GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I speak as a Member of the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee and also as shadow rapporteur on Romania. I will try to be brief. On the issue of Bulgaria and Romania we need a target date, a focus. Therefore I fully support the proposed target date. Also, during a recent visit to Malta I saw the wonderful work being done in connection with sexual orientation. We must not leave that out of the equation when we look at the rights of minorities. It was clear to me from the work of the Malta gay rights movement that the employment industrial relations act is not compliant with the employment framework directive, especially in relation to sexual orientation. I welcome the positive statements on Turkey. As regards the negative statements on Turkey, I am afraid that, sadly, we have seen racism and xenophobia rear their ugly heads. We must apply the same terms, conditions and principles. We cannot be selective in the application of principles. The same principles must apply to all the candidate countries and also to the countries such as Turkey which have indicated that they wish to join the European Union. If we turn Turkey away, I believe that will be an action that we will live to regret.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, for years European shipyards have been condemning the dumping practised by South Korea in relation to the sales prices of the ships built there. Finally, and after so many complaints about it, the Commission has presented an initiative, with the acquiescence of the Council, and has proposed certain provisional measures to us, which consist of a temporary defence mechanism, specifically designed to counteract Korea’s unfair practices, putting a complaint procedure before the World Trade Organisation. Nevertheless, the Commission, in its proposed aid to ship building, only includes container ships and oil tankers. We believe that it should also include special ships for the transportation of gases derived from oil and liquefied natural gas, as well as ferries, bulk carriers and roll-on roll-off car ferries, all of which are included in the complaints presented to the WTO. It is time that Korea realised that the Union is determined to defend its shipbuilding industry in the face of unfair practices by any other country.

Political group: Verts-ALE
The disturbing rates of accidents at work of self-employed people and the need to ensure the right to working conditions which respect health, safety and dignity required precisely this approach, which is why I have supported the excellent report by Mr Pérez Álvarez. Despite being inadequate, the Commission proposal makes a major contribution to resolving the problem of protecting self-employed workers with regard to health and safety at work. It should be noted that it is in the sectors considered to be high-risk, such as agriculture, fishing, road haulage, the processing industry and construction, in which a high number of self-employed workers is concentrated, that a high rate of accidents at work occurs. It is therefore crucial that an effective prevention policy is implemented, followed up by actions for training and information and by awareness-raising campaigns. Against a backdrop of increasing professional mobility, it is crucial that Community measures are adopted to harmonise the various levels of protection for self-employed workers in each Member State, in addition to the recognition and implementation of legislation in this field. - Hughes report (A5-0310/2002)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Labour delegation of the European Parliament voted against Mr Lehne's amendments to the common position. As I said in the debate last night, they would be very damaging for EU company competitiveness. They introduce rigid structures and try to bring company law in by the back door, which will not achieve a single market in capital and will undermine investor confidence of our shareholders. Following ten years of negotiation, I regret that this Parliament has chosen by a narrow qualified majority vote to allow company boards the right to defensive measures to frustrate takeovers without getting approval from shareholders. However, I welcome the fact that the Commission cannot go along with the rapporteur's views on this and I hope that common sense will prevail in conciliation. I am pleased that we rejected the rapporteur's very messy approach on jurisdiction: this would have led to very much litigation and court cases and would have served nobody's interests, not least the interests of EU companies. With the passage of Amendment No 20, the EPLP has made it clear that while employee consultation is the objective of a framework directive on employment, we also believe that a spirit of cooperation is needed to consult workforces and their representatives when we have discussions on takeovers and mergers.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy actually found it easy to write a report on this agreement, our opinion being, in essence, that we must, as far as at all possible, involve all the states in our geographical vicinity in our research and development programmes. We have to ensure that we stabilise and support their small business sectors and improve their infrastructures. Why is this such a cause for our concern? It is so, quite simply, because we depend on them and they on us. If, in certain of these states, there are unsafe nuclear power stations, then, should anything happen, its consequences directly affect us, simply because of their geographical situation. If, then, we endeavour to export as much as possible of our knowledge and expertise to them, we will be doing so in a win-win situation. It is for that reason that it matters to us that our aid programmes, TACIS being one example, should, as well as providing support, help countries to help themselves, so that developing states do not have to make all the mistakes we made in the course of our industrial history. We are also, let me add, dependent on the region for our energy supply, one example being the transport of crude oil. It follows that it is in our own interests that pipelines should be safe, that the tankers arriving here should be safe and not pollute our waters. If, then, the South Caucasus enjoys technological progress, it also, and at the same time, means safety and progress for us. We are grateful to the rapporteur for being so willing to take our suggestions on board, and also to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy for the excellent cooperation we have enjoyed with them.

Political group: PPE-DE
We voted against this report which again proposes, on the pretext of ‘combating terrorism’, to ‘facilitate co-operation between the police and judicial authorities in the fight against terrorism’. Stepping up repression wherever this may be (Ireland, the Basque Country, Corsica, etc) with contempt for the quest for a political solution, has not yet shown that it is the way to stamp out terrorism. Repression has instead, in response, played a part in fuelling terrorism. In reality, ‘combating terrorism’ is only being used here as a pretext to further strengthen Europe’s security measures, whilst once again highlighting the fact that it is beyond the control of the population. The fact that this proposal emanates from the Kingdom of Spain, whose security measures have retained many of the traits inherited from Francoism, does nothing to inspire confidence. It is certainly not a lack of security measures that Europe is suffering from. It is, on the contrary, suffering from abuses of security, where migrant workers must, in addition to all their other problems, deal with the suspicion of being potential ‘terrorists’.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, on 17 October this year 40 000 members of the armed forces launched Operation Clean Heart in Bangladesh. It resulted in house-to-house raids and searches aimed specifically at the Awami League's voters, party workers, the Hindu community and members of opposition political parties. Thousands were arrested and held in incommunicado detention. 25 people are alleged to have died after being tortured while in detention. The claim that these deaths were the results of heart attacks is frankly incredible. We call upon the Government of Bangladesh to hold an independent inquiry into who is responsible for this, to release members of parliament and opposition political leaders and to establish a Bangladesh national human rights committee. We would ask the Commission to liaise with the Government of Bangladesh under the cooperation agreement to ensure that violations stop and that human rights are protected, and request that the European Parliament be kept informed.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I think that the Treaty of Nice will go down in history as a clear example of a lost opportunity, due to the specific requirements of the unyielding defenders of the power of the Member States. The Member States are political structures that originated from the greatest capacity for production and mobility, born out of the discovery of the steam engine, which, according to the North American thinker Alvin Tofler, was the second great technological revolution for humanity. This meant that the political framework of the old kingdoms, counties, dukedoms and domains which, until then, had structured societies were small and useless. But since Marshall McLuhan talked about the world as a global village and Tofler himself pointed out information technologies as the third human revolution, the globalisation of political relations with regard to trade, the economy, defence, leisure, and so many other things has meant that the Member States are now also small and inadequate and cannot respond to the current needs of the people. Therefore, the future path for the European Union cannot be resolved through the measures adopted in Nice: what is needed is fewer powers for the Member States and more for the European institutions. We need a Constitution, a Parliament, a European Government and a President elected by the people.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I should like to commend you on your wisdom. Having heard all the discussion, I agree that it is an excellent idea to vote on my original report. It contains sufficient substance for it to be steered through Parliament soundly, and this will perhaps take some of the pain away. Putting the original report to the vote sounds like an excellent idea to me, therefore.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Sterckx for his thorough investigation into this issue and the excellent way in which he has prepared this report. The proposal for a directive as part of the second Erika package has focused attention on the matters that are essential for increasing safety at sea and reducing the environmental damage caused by accidents. Waterborne traffic is popular, partly because it is environmentally friendly. It is especially important for the EU’s peripheral regions and in commercial transport between the EU and non-member countries. The risk of accident has grown, however, with the increase in traffic. The committee has once again adopted some proposals to improve safety that are not contained in the Council’s common position. It is particularly important to ensure there are adequate salvage facilities and equipment to deal with oil spillages in all coastal zones. Likewise, we must see to it that essential search and rescue services are properly organised. Besides tightening up the rules still further we must ensure that the decisions taken are realistic and, furthermore, feasible. It is important for the interests of all concerned, however, that the proposal is adopted swiftly and that we make real progress in matters of safety. Because the directive should be adopted and implemented swiftly it is not appropriate to wait around for the decision of the meeting of the International Maritime Organisation in December. The directive’s annexes can be amended through the comitology procedure so that they are made to accord with what the IMO has decided. This procedure allows internationally agreed deadlines to be incorporated into the directive easily and swiftly. I would furthermore like to draw your attention to the fact that decisions taken by the Union alone to raise levels of safety at sea are not enough. We need global agreements to deal with such matters as responsibility.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, in my capacity as a Member of this House I often take part in Question Time to the Commission and to the Council. I see these occasions as opportunities to express opinions and to call these two institutions of the European Union to account. Questions I tabled recently concerning the war in Iraq have regularly been rejected as unacceptable on the grounds that value judgments are involved. One of these questions related to how the Prime Minister of Spain, Mr Aznar, threatened Mexico and Chile with obstacles in their association with the European Union if those two countries failed to vote for the notorious second United Nations resolution. In no way was this a value judgment. It was simply a statement. Mr Aznar had made those threats. Nonetheless, the question was rejected. A question I tabled for this sitting was also rejected. The question concerned the 13 people shot dead by members of the United States forces during a demonstration in a town in Iraq. It appears that such issues are effectively being censored. The freedom of expression of Members of the House is therefore being limited, when we are simply striving for peace and justice. I wanted to draw attention to this situation because I believe the matter is not being dealt with impartially, and that the freedom of expression of Members of this House is being restricted. I will reiterate my views during Question Time to the Council tomorrow.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, Commission, I would like to welcome the Prime Minister here. The next six months will be an exciting period. Important political tasks await us, and a successful presidency may hopefully also have a positive effect on public opinion. It can show our fellow countrymen at home that good things can be accomplished together in the EU. It can show our European colleagues here that Sweden is not in opposition to the European project but, rather, wishes to take a constructive part in it. The Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party fully supports Sweden’s decision to make enlargement a priority. There is no task more important than creating a united Europe, and the negotiations really need to take a major leap forward this spring. We would also like to have a date for when the first countries will be able to join us. Another issue – in which the Prime Minister has the support of both the Liberals and of large sections of Parliament – concerns openness. Public access to documents is an important democratic issue, which is central to citizens’ confidence in the entire EU project. During the autumn, the Council has been treading water on this issue – the work on Article 255 – and it is time that we saw some results. We have great hopes of Sweden and of Sweden’s role in promoting and powerfully defending the model applied, for instance, in Sweden and the Netherlands. As a case in point, why not begin by opening up the meetings of the Council of Ministers? The issue of democracy is also closely related to the events which are now to take place post-Nice. The treaties must be simplified. The EU’s tasks and powers must be more clearly defined. We Liberals also believe that Europeans need a common European constitution. Citizens must be involved in the work which will follow on from the conclusions of the Nice summit. It is up to Sweden to initiate the phase which President Prodi calls ‘open reflection’. It would be nice to be told in rather more concrete terms how the Prime Minister views this task, the method and these issues, which require further work before the Belgian Presidency begins. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, poor, small fishermen are missing out because there are too many big rich fishermen. The European Union is suffering from severe excess capacity in the fishing industry, and is solving this problem by shifting some of the production to developing countries. Instead of modernising the fisheries sector, more than EUR 1 billion of government money is being spent on doing so every year. Naturally, the governments of poor countries are delighted to receive large sums of money for allowing large-scale fishing in their waters. However, it is better to facilitate the development of the indigenous fishing industry in economically weak countries than it is to let local fishermen bob about in their boats while the enormous proceeds from the catches are credited to the accounts of big European ship-owners. The precise consequences for fish stocks and the environment are unfortunately still unknown. However, it is certain that small, local operations will not be able to compete without subsidies or state support, and will thus continue to suffer a marginal existence. The Spanish and Portuguese fleets in particular will have to be curtailed in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, there must be much stricter supervision of the way in which the developing countries spend their compensation payments. This spending must fit in with the policy of targeted poverty reduction. Local fisheries must also be involved in the spending to a much greater extent. The European fisheries policy must be brought much more closely in line with European development policy. The European Union must systematically provide technical assistance for transferring knowledge about fisheries resources to developing countries. Most importantly, the poor countries must gain the know-how, the capacity and the investment they need in order to be able to fish in their own waters in a responsible way. In the longer term we must move away from these fishing agreements, which maintain redundant European fishermen but which cause developing countries to miss out.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, as Mr Morillon has just reminded us, Madagascar is in dire economic and political straits. Unbelievable poverty, inter-clan fighting and ethnic tensions, compounded by corruption at all levels in regions entertaining vague notions of autonomy and partition are its overriding features. The political situation following the first round of presidential elections in Madagascar has exacerbated the breakdown in social cohesion and now looks set to plunge the entire country into total isolation, just like the capital. Serious internal unrest with dramatic human consequences and galloping recession has deprived the people of Madagascar of any real chance of choosing a president. Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I think there are three points which need to be highlighted in the resolution before Parliament today. The first is political support for the efforts of the OAU. In fact, it is only by supporting all the initiatives being taken by the Organisation for African Unity, calling on the leaders to find a peaceful solution to the conflict, that we shall reach a settlement. I should add, as our motion states, that a settlement will only come about if no other state unilaterally recognises the legitimacy of either leader. We have seen what happens in such cases in other regions of the world. It is not therefore up to the European Union to decide between the corruption and nepotism of the one and the self-proclamation – unacceptable in the eyes of international law – of the other. However, it is our duty to express our full and total support for the decisions taken in the Dakar agreement on 18 April 2002 with a view to setting up a reconciliation government and, more importantly, making provision for fresh consultations, this time, undeniably, with the Madagascan people. The only way to normalise democratic relations, let us not forget, is to put a stop to all forms of violence and violations of human rights. The second important point is that we need to guarantee emergency humanitarian aid in order to alleviate the awful conditions under which the people have been living for several months now. Finally, the third point I want to make is that it is also our duty and our responsibility to take any financial or political action needed to encourage the resumption of economic and social life, as this is the only guarantee of development in Madagascar which can respond to the real needs of its people. So we must keep our aid and cooperation programmes in place. I think, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, that this is a role to which the European Union is eminently suited.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the Commissioner probably gave us more than we already formally have in the extremely important negotiations which were preceded by many debates here in this Parliament, and were followed by a resolution which we presented to the Commission, to which the Commissioner made reference during the negotiations at every opportunity and stated: “in the final analysis, I need the majority and support of the European Parliament”. And we would now decide to hold a debate without a final say from us? I cannot really imagine this. I would also like to call on the fellow MEPs from the other parties, irrespective of the content of their opinions, to conclude this debate with a political verdict. We owe it to the Commission and to the dignity of this House. Since the negotiations are of such significance, we must really employ our full powers and reach a verdict.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission finally accepted the proposal we in the Group of the European People’s Party made to the effect that hake and cod should be dealt with separately and in different proposals, since their situations are not just slightly different, but very different. We are glad about this and we are also happy with the report, on which we congratulate our rapporteur, Mrs Stihler, despite the fact that originally she opposed our amendments to differentiate between the two species. Time has proved us to be right. Recovery plans are very delicate and serious issues, which must be approached with recourse to the greatest possible scientific knowledge and with the greatest possible support from the sector involved as well, given their significant socio-economic impact. Without the participation of scientists and fishermen, either directly or by means of the regional advisory councils, as proposed in the report, it is not possible to make a real, credible and transparent proposal, which is not only valid for cod, but for any other species or sector involved, as in the case of hake, whose sector we expect to hear soon in our committee. We support the consultation and we would also like to call on the European Commission to adapt the current Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural funds in the fisheries sector, so that the recovery plans are always accompanied by socio-economic measures cofinanced by the European Union in order to alleviate the negative consequences of the adoption of these recovery plans for the sector involved. This is the minimum we can ask for in order that the fishermen affected accept and comply with the plans laid down – whether they take place in Community or non-Community waters – whenever they affect European fleets, as in the recent case of the proposed recovery plan for halibut in NAFO waters. For all these cases, we must now provide for a general compensatory mechanism within the framework of the regulation I have mentioned, and we therefore call on Commissioner Fischler, for whose presence we are grateful, to make a proposal to Parliament in this regard.

Political group: PPE-DE