GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Thank you for your answer Commissioner. I take it, and I would like an expression of concern from you, that nuclear regulators have miscalculated the health risks from one of the world's most widespread nuclear pollutants. Adults are twice as likely as previously thought to develop cancer after being exposed to tritium and this particular tritium was discharged by a factory. However, the discharge of Tritium from the BNFL Sellafield reprocessing plant in Cumbria and Chapelcross Nuclear Power Station, to mention only one discharge, is extremely large – millions of litres of tritiated water and air every year. In fact the dose could be 12 times more dangerous for children according to the recent study. I think this is a major cause for concern, since the regulators have miscalculated. I am glad that you say that it will be referred to in the Marina II study. But as these facts have only recently come to light, it seems unlikely that the study can look very closely at the issue and I would like an assurance from you that it will be seriously followed up.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I just want to raise two points: one concerns the extra money in category 3 that we negotiated with the Council at the last Conciliation Committee meeting concerning the deal at Copenhagen, mainly concerned with the codecision procedures. I would like to remind the other committees that what we are trying to do, or at least what we and the Commission are trying to do is to ensure a legislative proposal is presented to Parliament and to the Council this year, hopefully between July and September, so that we can actually enshrine in legislation the amounts needed between now and the end of 2006. That of course means the committees which are involved in codecision reacting rather swiftly to make sure that we have that information so that we can make sure that this budget is complete. This is because what we want to do is to have a trialogue and a conciliation meeting with the Council in July to formalise this, not just for the 2004 budget, but also for the other two budgets. The other point I want to make concerns the format in which the budget is now presented. This is the new ABB format which Parliament asked for and insisted upon and which the Commission has now presented. The trouble is we do not know how to use it. We had a presentation last year to inform everyone, which we all conveniently forgot, and have had another presentation this year, but now we have the reality of the situation. We have actually seen the documents in their real true-life format, which means that we do not know how to make amendments to them. The fact that we work to financial perspectives within different categories or with different categories means that if we use the ABB system we will not know what the ceilings are within the different categories. So in the next 20 minutes, when we meet as the Committee on Budgets, Members – because we are simple souls after all – will have the new budget presented in two formats: one in the ABB which we have insisted upon, and one in the old format which we can understand. What we have to decide, when it comes to the votes later in the year, is how we are going to vote. This is an important issue and I want to thank the Commission for presenting the budget in the new format, whatever problems we have with it. I am sure it will give a lot more transparency and enable a lot more understanding in the long run. When we have a new financial perspective – who knows – it may even be in line with the ABB format of budgeting. Who knows?!

Political group: PSE
Mr President, on behalf of the Group, I wish to say to Mrs Langenhagen that we fully support her report and that we congratulate her on her excellent work. We s have tabled two amendments, to which I should like to ask the rapporteur to give her express support, on the social aspects of the processing industry, urging the Commission, the Member States and social operators to boost the collective negotiation designed to improve the quality of employment in this industry, especially bearing in mind that the majority of these jobs are performed by women, who have very little social protection and who, furthermore, commonly work on a highly casual basis. It is our view that adopting this approach would bring us closer to the objectives set at the Lisbon Summit to improve the quality of employment. We believe that improving the training of these nearly 100 000 workers in the processing industry and its conditions of employment, together with this sector’s own capacity for innovation and its dynamic, will help to ensure that this industry remains viable and that it has a future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, in view of the initial positions of the Council and the Commission, this budgetary procedure deals with the challenge of being capable of contributing to the historic task of enlargement and funding the reform of the working methods of our institutions. The reports by Mr Färm and Mr Stenmarck reflect Parliament’s concerns and priorities in relation to these issues and I therefore join in congratulating them on their excellent work. The budgetary guidelines must be based on elements which are of interest to the citizens: the objective of full employment and the Union’s solidarity policies. And, before mentioning other aspects, I would like to thank the Commissioner for her expressed commitment for 2003 to fund the last stage of the structuring programme for the fishing fleets. The budget for 2003 faces difficulties similar to those of recent years and rather more serious in the field of administrative expenditure. Furthermore, the Union’s commitments in external aid and the continuous demands of the security and defence policy must receive a budgetary response compatible with the rights of Parliament and the financial framework in force. In this respect, we must carefully analyse the Commission’s proposal on the creation of a new budgetary mechanism to confront the implications of the crisis. In the field of management we may come across difficulties in payments, despite the fact that year after year we have a surplus. It is therefore necessary to have detailed knowledge of the final amount resulting from the non-execution of the spending commitments and, likewise, to know the evaluations necessary in the medium term of the multiannual commitments of policies funded by means of heading 3. This could provide us with a margin for flexibility in order to more efficiently adapt political priorities to the available resources. Finally, I would point out that the citizens have offered an historic example of confidence by accepting the euro without hesitation and they have shown us the way forward. The Union’s budget must reflect this confidence and contribute to strengthening the policies of the States aimed at full employment, solidarity and economic growth.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as rapporteur for a new Interim Agreement between the European Union and Turkmenistan, and having consulted the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, I have delayed the parliamentary discussion, despite the hesitant go-ahead received from our Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Security and Defence Policy. The reasons for my action were that democracy is increasingly becoming a sham, and that there is even a president who has had himself appointed for life. There is no political will for reform in Turkmenistan, as that country is riding roughshod over human rights, especially the rights of religious minorities, both Islam and Christian. Additionally, the proper implementation of European-funded TACIS projects is being frustrated by poor management and by a lack of adequate information and sound financial accountability. Mr President, it is only natural that all fledgling democracies will struggle at first, but riding roughshod over human rights cannot be tolerated and cannot be reconciled with a new Interim Agreement between the European Union and Turkmenistan. As MEP and rapporteur, I warmly recommend the urgency declaration to my fellow MEPs.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is only right and proper that this item be discussed, for it is an extremely sad and serious matter, particularly as it originates from a nation that is on friendly terms with both the European Union and the Netherlands. The suggestion, not only made as a proposal, but now also approved in the American Senate, that there is every likelihood that American military can come to the Netherlands to free people who are brought before the International Criminal Court, is an unprecedented provocation in respect of a NATO partner. It is of the absolute essence that this matter be looked into and raised for discussion. In addition, it is absolutely necessary to send a missive to the United States not only from the Netherlands, as a protest has already been lodged there, but also from the European Union, in order to explain to them that this is totally unacceptable and is going too far. We must solve this as good friends and not with something like a threat of war.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, my group supports the policies set out by the Council Presidency and the Commission. I believe that we should be careful not to miss the point here. The air transport sector is experiencing a cyclical and structural crisis, as has been pointed out, but the whole of the European economy – and of the world economy – is also in crisis. The real response to the employment problem is therefore, of course, to relaunch growth and general policies of social solidarity and job creation. As far as the air transport sector is concerned, and in connection with the meeting on the social dialogue referred to by Mrs Diamantopoulou, I believe that the deterioration in working conditions and wages that is starting to occur in this sector is obviously a point to which we must pay a great deal of attention. Moreover, at the level of the European Union, we would like to see the Community’s competition policy adopted and, far from preventing the restructuring of the sector, coming to the aid of that sector, and we should also like this medium-term restructuring policy to be compatible with the policies set out in the White Paper on transport policy, in other words the development of a multi-mode transport policy which reflects, in the medium term, the real situation regarding costs for all sectors as a whole. Finally, and I believe that it is necessary to draw attention to this point, this Parliament has always voted, by a clear majority, against any spiralling in state aids. I would find it hard to understand if the majority of this House were to unleash a spiralling growth in state aid to one particular sector. Finally, on the subject of the United States, let us be clear among ourselves. The United States of America have presented us with a policy which is a fait accompli. Their position on aid to their air transport sector is unacceptable and contrary to fair competition at international level. Since we cannot, apparently, take the issue to the WTO, it is essential that in the context of the overall partnership between the United States and Europe, the European Union should be able to protect those legitimate interests which will, in the long term, work to the benefit of both the American and the European airlines.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the von Wogau report understandably makes no mention of the Commission's criticism levelled at the UK's Labour Government. Chancellor Brown, no doubt with the general election of 7 June in mind, decided to promise considerable increases in public spending, particularly on health and education, threatening, without tax rises, to breach the stability and growth pact agreements and to raise the proportions spent by the public sector beyond the desirable current 38% level of GDP. Mr Berlusconi's new government and promised economic package may also be problematic for the Commission, but it is particularly rich for the British Chancellor to reject this criticism from the Commission as interfering in sovereign British fiscal affairs, while at the same time making active plans for a referendum to join the euro, subject to his arbitrary five economic tests, which make no mention of the constitutional issues behind EMU, which are dear to British Conservatives. Once the UK is in the euro zone, we will have even less fiscal autonomy, and I do not know what politically – as opposed to legally – binding guidelines really mean in practice, as we are forced to harmonise our taxes upwards to avoid so-called unfair tax competition and avoid distortion in Mr von Wogau's proposed European home market. That is a name that I, as a UK Member, object to, as it suggests that the three states remaining outside the euro, of which my country is one, are not at home in Europe's single market; so I would strongly suggest that euroland or euro zone is much the preferred label and I wish the zone every success for the future. Although I personally have a problem with the term ‘social market economy’, as we in Britain associate it with social democracy, the description in the report rightly encapsulates the vision of a dynamic, deregulated, competitive, free-market economy that is sensitive to the needs of the environment and the labour markets, which I clearly welcome. However, I am not so sure whether the comments regarding the European Central Bank's first two years are exactly correct. It has not been a great success, and they are still muddling through and remain somewhat opaque in their decision-making process. This was clearly demonstrated by the quarter percent interest rate reduction last week which came across as panicky and a knee-jerk reaction to the downturn in the American economy and seemed to fly in the face of their own monetary and inflation targets as well as many speeches by Mr Duisenberg. On another matter, I too call on the EU to implement rapidly the suggested liberalisation of the energy, post, airport and railway sectors. I personally also support the single sky initiative. Mr von Wogau was right: Europe will not become a fortress and overall, in spite of all the problems in the world, its prospects look relatively rosy in these uncertain times.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, rapporteur and Commissioner, this report is a tragic tale about a fish which one author has quoted as literally changing the world in the past thousand years. The beginning of this new millennium is very different from the beginning of the last. There has been a fishing spree across the world touching everywhere, the Irish Sea being no exception, and the results are devastating. The dramatic decline in cod in the Irish Sea is all too apparent. From 1988 to 1997 the Republic of Ireland's cod catch declined from 5 821 tonnes to 1 492 tonnes. It takes no mathematician to tell you that conservation is critical if there are to be cod fisheries at all in the Irish Sea. Before I speak about technical measure, no one has talked about the fish itself. Did you know that cod will eat anything? Cod are quite lazy fish. The whiteness which we all enjoy eating actually is due to sluggishness rather than muscle tone yet the irony is that cod is a dieter's delight. Cod contains only 0.3% fat and boasts 18% protein, and when dried the protein dramatically increases to 80%. There is no waste in cod. The range of culinary delights a cod provides is extensive – and there are books written about this. This report outlines the technical measures which can be used to preserve juvenile cod. It deals primarily with mesh sizes and nets. The rapporteur does mention compensation, but I say this with some caution: compensation is a slippery slope. It can provide short-term solutions for a longer-term problem. Sustainable fisheries, where fishermen and their families can survive alongside conservation measures, are mutually beneficial. That will allow cod stocks time to replenish in order to ensure sustainable fisheries again. Let us make sure that in this millennium people can enjoy cod from the Irish Sea just as much as they did in the last millennium.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, pensioners and elderly people are in favour of innovation, even though it may appear otherwise, and so, as representative of the Pensioners' Party, I cannot help but support the inclusion of any rules leading to innovative measures when decisions are taken on the Structural Funds. On this occasion, after stating that I voted for the motion, of course, I would call – and I do so willingly – for, in future, the projects to be financed as innovative actions to include projects which are concerned not only with improving working conditions in the strict sense but also with everything which affects pensioners, who, during the period in which they are not working, use the contributions they paid in when they were working, and so this period is, indirectly, a continuation of their working activity. - Virrankoski report (A5-0192/2000)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have today returned from Mozambique where the European Union has been responsible for brilliant humanitarian assistance following the flood disaster, but, once again reconstruction projects, where we have already allocated the money, are delayed while signatures in Brussels are awaited. Reform of external assistance “yes”, sufficient staff numbers to manage projects “yes”, decentralisation to delegations “yes”, increased emphasis on programming, movement to ex post financial assessment, streamlined comitology arrangements “yes”, “yes”, “yes”. Late at night, when we have to be clear, even blunt and when my esteemed colleague, Mrs Sauquillo Pérez del Arco, has had to use the instrument of an own-initiative report to ensure parliamentary accountability, the Commission should listen when European Parliament says “no”. First, the emasculation of DG Development will deform not reform external assistance. We want a single development directorate covering policy and implementation, covering trade and aid, covering Asia, Africa and Latin America, when the Commission still proposes to peel off these other policy areas, still proposes a hybrid with programming undertaken separately. Second, we demand an end to the practice of draining external assistance away from developing countries towards the EU’s own borders in recent years. The reform communication of 16 May does not once mention the word “poverty” nor does the General Affairs Council Resolution of 9 October. We need to ensure the EU lives up to the promises made at the UN summits, that development is paramount, and to do so by guaranteeing a fixed percentage of external assistance to the world’s least developed countries. Finally, we should understand that Mr Patten’s proposal for aid responsible to a board of Commissioner directors with Mr Nielson as Chief Executive is an unworkable gimmick borrowed from management text books and is fundamentally incompatible with the collegiate structure of the Commission itself. It is precisely because Mr Nielson is loyal to that collegiate responsibility that he will doubtless defend the proposal tonight. So I hope others in the Commission will hear us when we say we have a highly effective development Commissioner. Let us give him the political responsibility to do the job.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to begin by congratulating the Irish people, as well as the Danish Presidency, which has done a tremendously good job, and the Commission, which has been working on the issue for a long time. There is of course a large number of problems associated with enlargement. The opportunities outweigh the problems, however, although obviously we do need to solve the problems. They should not be allowed to overshadow the opportunities. It is a question of our children and children’s children. It is a question of creating a Europe of peace and democracy for our children and children’s children. It is a question of a better environment. Sweden shares a border with many of these countries: we have the Baltic in common, for example. If we wish to tackle the problems of the Baltic region for the future, we can simply do it together. It is also a question of workers' rights in countries bordering on ours, so that these countries cannot practise social dumping, and so that they have fairer conditions and stronger trade unions. All of this is our responsibility. The President said that we need to have information campaigns. Of course we do, but this is first and foremost a political responsibility. Now is the time for us, the politicians, to get out of the conference room and hold a dialogue with the people in our Member States, with a view to convincing them of the importance of enlargement. I would like to see a change in agricultural policy. We need a change in structural policy, but this must not be made a condition for enlargement. It is not the candidate countries’ responsibility, but our responsibility – the responsibility of all of us – to make a change in agricultural and structural policy. A brief word about Kaliningrad. I hope that a solution can be found, particularly so that the people are able to move freely over the borders. We should not forget another aspect, which is that there is a risk of the gulf between Kaliningrad and Lithuania widening when Lithuania undergoes improved development as a Member State. This could potentially lead to tensions in the border regions. It is important, therefore, to make efforts in the social and economic fields for the people in the Kaliningrad area, too.

Political group: PSE