GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Madam Vice-President, I would like to start by apologising for my absence from the beginning of the debate, having arrived in Strasbourg only this morning. All the things that have been gone through in detail should actually, I think, give us cause for rejoicing this morning, for we have come a long way, even if it took us three years to do it. The Commission said in its first speech – which was in the summer of 1999 – that a single system of air traffic control is a typically European problem, and one that we must deal with in a European way. The Vice-President then set up the high-level working party. We MEPs were not entirely happy with that, but it was the right thing to do in that she was trying to take on board the concerns of the Member States, which feared ill-founded centralisation. It was therefore right to set up the high-level working party, which submitted its report in 2000. Then, in 2001, the Commissioner set out the proposals for directives. Today, having had good debates in Committee, Parliament is to complete the First Reading stage, which means that we have come a very long way in three years and we should just rejoice in that. Secondly, some philosophical differences remain, and that is only natural, but let us just give them some thought. I believe that there are sufficient examples to demonstrate that military and civil air traffic control can be integrated and linked up, thus becoming more effective, including in the interests of military security. This antithesis between military air traffic control and its civil counterpart is something we should overcome. For another thing, we should emphatically reiterate that we are democrats and that democracy means that it is the government, monitored by Parliament, that has to come to a decision. That is why Eurocontrol is, at the end of the day, something which we cannot get into bed with. Eurocontrol is a board of civil servants whose technical expertise and function of providing services in specific sectors we acknowledge, but it is the European Union, the Commission, that must exercise a regulatory function, and be monitored in doing so by us, as it is we who are responsible for regulations enacted by the State. Madam Vice-President, perhaps you could tell us in your response with what success the Council has met. With the high-level working party you gave the Council every opportunity, and yet it was able to conduct negotiations in parallel. Can we be certain that the Council will finalise the dossier with a Common Position by Christmas? Only if it does will we be able to achieve the objective by 2004.

Political group: PPE-DE
I will be brief. I do not see the relevance of this idea of ex-territoriality. We are talking about major European oil companies and they should be held accountable for their activities. We must not forget that the money and the profits that are being made by these companies are coming back into Europe. Major European companies have to be accountable in how they operate in other parts of the world. If there was binding legislation that major European companies had to adhere to, then you would not have the situation we have at present. This does not just concern major oil companies, it also concerns other European multinationals which ignore their responsibilities for human rights, for the environment and for basic civil liberties. They are making huge profits and we here are benefiting from those profits. We have to address that issue.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, on a point of order. Your words echoed the sentiments of everyone in the House and certainly of my group. It is important that we discuss the issue and that it should be treated as an issue in its own right and not as part of a longer list of issues, where we are trying to deal with so many points before Biarritz. If we could in some way find a way of looking at this item separately, my group would greatly appreciate that.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, I too would like to congratulate Mrs Ghilardotti on the fact that there are not just 20 Members present to debate this report, but that for once we are at last considering equalities issues with a full House. (Applause) Gender budgeting is a relatively recent idea, which was developed at the 1995 World Conference on Women in Beijing. In the context of gender mainstreaming, it involves analysing public budgets to assess their differing impacts on men and women, and to raise awareness among political and economic actors – which we have ample opportunity to do today. Discrimination very soon becomes apparent when figures talk and we see that only 6% of the Structural Funds are geared towards helping women. Let me give you another example from the EU Budget: the forest protection programme has a budget of EUR 52 million, whereas the programme for the protection of children, young people and women is allocated only EUR 41 million, a clear 20% less. The Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities hopes, by means of this report, to stimulate a debate that will expose the inequality and discrimination in the Budget. But we need instruments to achieve that, and this point is addressed to you personally, Commissioner Solbes Mira: please work within the Commission to ensure that we finally get the directive under Article 13, which relates to discrimination on grounds of gender, which will at last give us a significant instrument. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
I welcome the EP’s adoption of the Trakatellis report as it provides for the setting of high standards of quality and safety of blood and blood derivatives. EU citizens are entitled to expect the highest level of safety with blood products. It is imperative that we safeguard the health, safety and confidence of patients, users and third parties and set conditions on placing such products on the market. We must at the same time seek to guarantee continuity of supply of safe products at affordable prices to both individual citizens and public health authorities.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like in fact to reformulate the question. Mr Danielsson, I see this question as a political question, which it is; but most of all as a humanitarian question. You have just mentioned the Dover tragedy, which all Europeans regret, but I must say – and I have direct experience of this problem, even though I do not live in southern Spain – that there in Andalusia and also sometimes in the Canary Islands we experience a Dover every week. What is happening in southern Spain is much more serious than Dover, Mr Danielsson, and I believe it requires some interference, if I may use this expression. In Austria, the European Member States interfered when faced with the threat of xenophobia. I believe this question is so serious that it requires some special action. I am grateful for your answer, which was otherwise full and informed, but I believe a far more serious intervention is needed. Every week, hundreds of people are detained on the Spanish coastline and every week people die, often pregnant women, and as I said the other day, children too. Have a look at the photos that appear in the Spanish press (I am just finishing, Mr President), Mr Danielsson, and you will be shocked. Therefore I ask you to go beyond your clarifications and tell me what explanations you are requesting from the Spanish authorities and whether you will demand from them not just political measures but humanitarian ones too.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, given the complexity of the case and its very political nature, I will ask for a break between the vote on all of the amendments and articles and the final vote. The Rules of Procedure allow for this.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to add my congratulations to those already offered to the rapporteur for these two superb reports. With regard to the first report, I will simply make mention of the floods and the victims that there were in the East of Spain, attributed to climate change, as the previous speakers have already talked about both these things. With regard to the second report, I consider that emissions trading should be approached as an instrument with which to facilitate the fulfilment of obligations under the Kyoto Convention. Various attitudes have been adopted in the face of this flexible mechanism: expectant, reactive or active. I think that from both the economic and environmental point of view we must adopt an active stance. Reasons for this include the realistic consideration that this will enable us to achieve short-term environmental goals by establishing specific reduction levels, and timetables for fulfilment. This is also an opportunity to encourage research and development in the field of new technologies for controlling pollution, contrary to the opinion of those who believe that this mechanism is a way of perpetuating the interests of the large polluting corporations. If this tool is correctly applied, pollution will become more and more expensive and the market will ensure that products obtained through the least clean methods become obsolete. Likewise, making emissions the subject of trade will lead to greater control over them and, what is more, they will be documented. This will promote the development of activities with a less significant environmental impact. It is essential that this mechanism is developed transparently as an integral part of the raft of measures that the Member States is to adopt within the context of the European climate change strategy. To this end, all the Member States must take great pains to communicate with the public so that it is clear from the outset which objectives are being pursued with this mechanism and what the benefits are, that these are always partial and complementary to other types of measure. In this way there can be no misunderstandings.

Political group: PPE-DE
The European Commission – and especially the Commissioner – deserves a show of approval for this initial integral policy document on the subject of poverty and social exclusion. It is true that social policy has a dual role to play: promote social cohesion, but also productivity. The Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities therefore warmly supports the analysis that poverty and social exclusion can only be overcome by increasing productivity and the earning capacity of so-called underprivileged groups. This applies all the more to women. This is why it is slightly unfortunate that this analysis has not been thought through properly. Indeed, we looked for, and failed to find, the insight that it is due to the unequal distribution of paid and unpaid labour between men and women that women are over-represented among the poor. Poverty among women is directly linked to their lack of economic independence. The latter must be stimulated by means of paid work that generates a sustainable income for women themselves and for their dependants. If the Commission and the Member States were willing to adopt this gender analysis, the level of women’s economic independence in Europe would need to be re-examined, and this factor would need to play an autonomous role in the analysis framework and in the policy goals of the anti-poverty policy. Indeed, single older women and single mothers with young children are particularly vulnerable groups. Their vulnerability, however, will not diminish unless the causes are truly identified. As long as the overburdening with unpaid work prevents women, and women with children, in particular, from developing their own earning capacity, they will remain vulnerable groups. The so-called combination of work with care, which stands an excellent chance as an emancipation strategy at the moment, can also turn out to be a pitfall if too much emphasis on part-time work and holiday arrangements for women prevent these women from developing and maintaining sufficient earning capacity. The open coordination method can, in this connection, result in useful policy comparisons, and I am looking forward to this with interest. However, in this framework, the indicators used to measure poverty should no longer be gender-blind, but also chart the individual incomes of the individual family household members.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it is becoming increasingly clear that the violence on the Moluccas is not a chaotic, spontaneous fight between the local population, between local Muslims and Christians. It is a brutal power struggle and well-directed fight between sections of the army, between the government and government opponents, at the expense of the local population. On the one hand there is Laskar Jihad, a group of fanatical Muslims backed by sections of the army. On the other hand there are special police troops, which back the Christians. In other words, the security apparatus which should guarantee stability, is divided over two camps. In my opinion, the message which the European Parliament should give President Wahid – and in this sense I hope I can reassure Mrs Maij-Weggen – is that we will remain critical of the progress and speed of reforms, the status of human rights and the way in which the government protects the citizens on the Moluccas. However, we must also let him know that we support him in his fight against those sections of the army which are of course trying to undermine democratic reform, in his battle against people like Amien Rais, the chairman of the People’s Consultative Assembly who, for example, referred to young people devoted to the Laskar Jihad as the heart of the nation. In that sense, he deserves our support, but I also want us to remain critical about issues which are not going so well yet in Indonesia.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, I would like to put on record my disappointment that we will not be able this week to discuss the money-laundering directive. Thanks to the hard work of the Conciliation Committee and those in this House who have been working on this directive, we are on the point of an agreement with the European Council, and it is a pity that we were not able to get it on the agenda for this week. This directive is as important in the fight against terrorism as the bombs which are being dropped on Afghanistan or the efforts of those who are risking their lives there. It is something that we should deal with as promptly as possible, because starving the terrorist of his funds is just as important as subjecting him to military attack. I hope this House will act swiftly when this matter comes before it at the next plenary session. I am sorry that it was not possible to get it on the agenda for this month. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, on a point of order. I would like to draw to the House's attention the action of Levi Strauss, the jeans manufacturer, which is today closing two of its Scottish plants. 650 Scots, mostly women, face the prospect tonight of losing their jobs and their livelihoods. Local politicians and trade unions are calling for meetings with the company. The lack of information and consultation by this company is quite a disgrace, showing more clearly the importance of proper information and consultation legislation prior to such a decision being announced. I would ask this House to show solidarity in supporting the workforce in Dundee and Bellshill and the families who have been affected by this decision today. I ask the President of Parliament to write to Levi Strauss to ask why it is shedding so many European jobs and why it has not properly consulted its workforce.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, there is clearly something wrong with the policy governing the appointment of foreign teachers in Italy, if they are only granted temporary appointments as technical administrative employees. This leaves them in a precarious legal position, and means that they receive lower pay than their Italian colleagues for the same work. This has already been established by the Court of Justice and the ombudsman. What is important is whether this came about by unhappy accident, or whether a quite deliberate decision was taken to maintain this distinction on a permanent basis. I assume that the Italian educational authorities are already fully appraised of the criticism, but the impression I am getting is that this has not convinced them of the need to do things differently from now on. Even though I am an advocate of national autonomy and the right to diversity, I endorse the motion for a resolution because there must never be discrimination on the basis of nationality. If we adopt the proposed resolution, will it bring about any changes in the situation, or is there nothing the European Union can do about it at the end of the day? Is Italy to receive a fine by way of punishment? Are we going to carry on complaining, with our hands tied, or are other Member States going to follow suit and start discriminating against Italian teachers?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, like some of the previous speakers this evening, I am very pleased the Council came forward with this proposal. I do not think that it will be helped by the amendments being proposed inside this Parliament today and indeed in our committee. Whatever they say about having had to vote for the report as a whole at the end in the committee, it does not persuade me that some committee members did not also have concerns about the effects of some of those amendments. Some of the opportunities of this nascent market, which we are now seeing emerge in the European Union, will be affected by some of the suggestions being made. Whereas money supply, of course, is of very direct interest to any central bank, there is in this case no direct inference that it will have the effect that everyone suggests it will have, i.e. that e-money will be anything other than a means of exchange, a redeemable voucher if you like or a mechanism expected to be involved in trade. Because of the very limits that Mr Huhne talked about, this is, of course, very closely controlled by the Council's proposed waiver and particularly by some of the sensible compromises suggested earlier. I personally, and the EPLP Group, could wholeheartedly support something like the compromise Amendment No 5 which Mrs Kauppi put forward in committee; but I am afraid if Amendments Nos 3 and 4 were adopted here in Parliament this week, we would see this legislation fall. Be in no doubt about that, this legislation would fall. I would worry very seriously about the motives of the people who would like to see this legislation fall, because any vacuum which would be created would be a vacuum the European Central Bank would find itself eased into. As an institution which has kept outside any form of regulation that is decided here or anywhere else, I find that a worrying idea. Let me ask all comrades and colleagues around this room today to consider the effects of the amendments that could be passed this week, the damage they could cause, the lack of confidence that would surely emerge and the damage it would do to this nascent market.

Political group: PSE
Does the Council believe that EU funding of organisations which provide abortion where legal, or which promote legislation for abortion where currently illegal, is compatible with the declaration by the World Medical Association's second assembly in Geneva in 1948, which calls for the utmost respect for human life, from the time of conception? Does the Council believe that the Republic of Ireland's budget for bilateral overseas aid, which commits almost more funds for reproductive health than for safe drinking water and adequate sanitation, is compatible with the European Union's commitment to improving the provision of basic health care in the developing world?

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Mr Ferber, you were absolutely correct when you defined the key criteria as affordable prices, high quality and universal availability. We agree with you there. But you did forget one other criterion. Our responsibility for our national economies also obliges us to maintain a high level of employment. Because we share these values, this Commission and this committee took the decision they did, and for that I actually ought to be grateful to the privatiser and liberaliser-in-chief, Mr Bolkestein. Anyone who is so ill-prepared to enter into negotiations, anyone who fails to present the requested report on the impact of the 1997 Directive, anyone who argues from an ideological platform – 'We shall achieve these very aims you have identified by liberalising, liberalising and liberalising again' – need hardly wonder when he falls flat on his face! Your original report, Mr Ferber, was very closely modelled on Mr Bolkestein's, and I must express my gratitude to you for the fact that you allowed reason to prevail in the end. I do believe that the compromise which is now on the table takes account of the aforementioned criteria, and I am delighted that our rejection of the general liberalisation of express services and cross-border services has now been set down in black and white. I am pleased that special services have not been redefined. I am gratified that there is no deadline for liberalisation, because the paramount aim from a national economic point of view must be to provide the population with proper postal services. I believe that a guaranteed universal service is the only way to achieve this aim in practice. I am not a dyed-in-the-wool opponent of the market or of liberalisation, but the request that was made for a systematic, professional and painstaking analysis of all the implications of the directive has not been met, and that is why I am prepared to accept the present compromise proposal.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Following on from that question, Commissioner, I should like to raise the issue of derogation and the issue of regulations that are being unilaterally applied by some countries that have not applied for derogation. In the case of the UK, it has indicated that it is not going to put any block on the movement of those who wish to come and work in the UK. Now, however, late in the day, it is talking about a number of regulations of a domestic nature, in relation to our social security and other systems, that will have a discriminatory effect here. Does the Commission have a view on this approach or is it happy to leave it entirely at the disposal of domestic governments to decide how they will deal with the matter within the first two years?

Political group: PPE-DE
The establishment of the European Police College is one more step towards the creation of a police state at a European level, which the ruling class believes is necessary to protect its interests from the demands of ordinary people. Combating crime is simply a pretext. The establishment of the European Police College is in keeping with the decision taken by the Feira Council to create a mobile ‘expeditionary’ force of repression with police, judicial and correctional powers, which the European Union will use for ‘non-military crisis management’ anywhere on the planet. It is especially important to stress that the European Police College, which is expected to start its operations on 1 January 2001, is not simply a network of the national training institutes of the Member States of the European Union; it also involves the applicant countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Indeed, for greater effectiveness its permanent seat will be close to the border between the current European Union and the applicant countries. For these reasons, the Members of the European Parliament from the Communist Party of Greece will be voting against the report.

Political group: GUE-NGL