GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, it is a disgrace for the European Parliament to receive the president of Colombia, Álvaro Uribe Vélez, tomorrow with honours. It is a disgrace for the s who made the proposal and for everyone who accepted it. Mr Uribe and his government, with the support of the USA, are responsible for the death of thousands of trade union farmers and other grass-roots fighters. They refuse ethnic reconciliation, they show contempt for the numerous recommendations of the UN Commission on Human Rights and they seek to suppress grass-roots dissatisfaction with military means. Mr Uribe's presence here shows that the European Union is moving towards getting involved in the ‘Columbia’ plan, through which the USA intervenes cruelly in this country, in an aim to achieve general control over the area. We condemn all external intervention and call for all governments to stand by the side of the grass-roots forces in Columbia so that the bloodshed and the activities of the paramilitary forces stop, peace is protected and human rights are respected. We express the undivided solidarity of the Communist Party of Greece with the Columbian people who, we are sure, will win in the end.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I have voted in favour of this very important report in defence of human dignity as something unique, inviolable and shared by all in equal measure. It is a question of giving expression to the common basis of values that European cooperation must ultimately rest upon. Female genital mutilation causes irreparable damage to health and can even lead to death. Any form of female genital mutilation, of whatever degree, is nothing other than an act of violence which constitutes a violation of the woman’s or girl’s fundamental rights, particularly the right to personal integrity and physical and mental health and of her sexual and reproductive rights. Such violation and mutilation of a human being can under no circumstances be justified by respect for a religion such as Islam or by invoking traditional cultural practices or initiation ceremonies. Religious freedom and female genital mutilation have no connection with one another. Female genital mutilation is an assault on the rights of women and children as enshrined in several international conventions and is prohibited in the criminal legislation of the Member States. Moreover, it is in breach of the principles of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. It is therefore time for any form of female genital mutilation now to be classified in the EU’s Member States as a specific crime, irrespective of whether or not the woman concerned has given any form of consent, and for anybody who helps, encourages, advises or procures support for anybody to carry out genital mutilation to be punished. Report Smet (A5-0275/2001)

Political group: PPE-DE
Yes to liberalisation, but on the right terms. I am in favour of opening port services to competition, subject to conditions, which ensure satisfactory safety standards. I chose to abstain on the compromise that emerged from the conciliation procedure, because the result of the interinstitutional negotiations fail to reflect the work that has been done over a period of more than two years. Had the text been approved as it now stands, port services would have been opened to competition on terms which were far removed from the reality of seaport operations and, more seriously, which were detrimental to maritime safety. On the issue of self-handling, there should have been a provision designed to guarantee that each of the handling services would be performed by suitably qualified staff, but the draft in its present form contains no such provision. I am in favour of gradual opening of port services to competition, and I am convinced of its beneficial economic effects, but all these things have to be properly prepared. As the elected representative of a coastal city, I do not consider that the proposed directive was worded in such a way that it corresponded to the actual situation on the ground. This radical change in the life of seaports has to be prepared differently. Ideally, each port service should be the subject of a specific instrument rather than being crammed into an ‘all-inclusive’ package like this latest proposal. I hope that the Commission’s future proposals will be based on this different approach. - Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou report (A5-0396/2003)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I wish to underline the point made by Mr Napolitano and Mr Voggenhuber that it is absolutely vital that this Parliament be fully and properly represented in the preparation of the Union charter of rights. May I also say to Madam President-in-Office that subsidiarity must be as vitally respected at Tampere as in all aspects of the work of this Union. I represent an electoral region which has had an independent legal system with a distinct tradition in justice and home affairs for over 500 years. It is not a Member State itself, but we in Scotland now have again a parliament which legislates for our justice and home affairs. It is vital that this and other such regions are fully and properly borne in mind when policies are developed dealing with these matters. Finally, I agree very much indeed with what Madam President-in-Office said about making rights effectual. It is no use having charters of rights and having rights enshrined in treaties if these are ignored in practice. It has been drawn to my attention, in the short time I have been in this House, that there are foreign language lecturers in Italy who for eleven years have had rights declared by the European Court of Justice effectively denied by a Member State of this Union. I hope that the Council and the Commission will take the strongest measures to ensure in this and other cases that we do not have rights and then see them rendered ineffectual by state action.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, I believe that the Commissioner and we as Parliament are right to claim responsibility for a measure adopted in this parliamentary term that is finally effective in the area of safety at sea. What we are dealing with is a series of provisions that completes the picture of fruitful work, which includes the provision for double hull tankers to be on the black list of ships that are no longer sea-worthy, the call for Member States to provide a list of refuge ports: a raft of measures that have been taken during this parliamentary term and for which we must give credit to the Commission, but for which we must also claim our part. This is, therefore, what compelled me and my group to fully support the Pex report, in particular, and I would like to highlight one of its amendments – which I have heard being challenged in parts but I believe that we should all appreciate how useful it is – on the call for a European coastguard to be set up as rapidly as possible. We cannot call for greater controls, we cannot expect sanctions to be enforced if we do not have the instruments to do so effectively. This would be a great step forwards, also for a whole range of other issues that we are faced with in the European Union, not least that of illegal immigration. I believe that we need to carry out a general review. On the issues of safety – aviation safety, as we heard just now, safety at sea, and I would add food safety – European public opinion is at times far ahead of governments; it calls for more Europe, for European regulations. We should feel encouraged by this feeling amongst the public and also call on the Council, which has to date been somewhat reticent on these issues, to not disappoint such important expectations, which, for our fellow citizens, have increased recently and which can really give us important results for the future. IN THE CHAIR: MR PACHECO PEREIRAVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I will begin by saying that I am Andalusian and that I live in Andalusia, though I am not so arrogant as to claim that I represent the entire Andalusian people, as Mr Bautista has done – although that arrogance is based on very few votes. The truth is that I would have liked him to have felt so vehemently Andalusian when it came to signing this House’s condemnation of terrorism – and this must be said this afternoon more unequivocally and with less reticence – especially given that more than 70% of the members of the security forces murdered by ETA have been Andalusians. Having said this, we must remember that there has been a lot of contradictory information since May when the nuclear submarine Tireless, belonging to the British navy, chose the port of Gibraltar – which flies the British flag – to have repairs carried out on the cooling system of its nuclear reactor, which, according to the British authorities initially, presented no special difficulty or any danger to the inhabitants of the area. Further explanations have followed and concern about what was happening to the Tireless has been increasing. The Spanish Government, from the outset, has held a position based on two points: the need for transparent information, based on technical and scientific criteria, in order to assess the scope of the repairs and their potential risk; and also, the view that any decision, either on its repair in Gibraltar or on its removal to a naval base in the British Isles, be taken in accordance with rigorous technical principles. This has been and, in our view, remains, the most coherent position and the one which safeguards the interests and safety of all the parties involved. Of course, what has been neither coherent nor appropriate has been the deliberate creation of social alarm in the area, with the clear purpose of turning this problem into an attack on the Spanish Government. In this event, we must tell our Spanish Socialist Members – with the greatest of respect – that they have allowed party interests to be placed above State interests. This is demonstrated by the curious agreement which they reached with British Labour Members to take responsibility away from the people who own the submarine, the people who are responsible for its mooring and remaining in Gibraltar and who are responsible for its repair, and who are also in charge of the port in which it is anchored. The important thing at the moment is to ensure that we are provided with good, transparent information, with a sufficient scientific basis, on the scope and consequences of the repairs, and that there be a serious study of the possibilities and risks involved in a possible removal of the submarine, if that becomes necessary. What we do not need are demagogic attitudes, which can only be explained by pure party-political opportunism and which create, amongst other things, alarm and concern within a population which has every right to safety and information, but which need not endure, as well as all this, being manipulated.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the debate on the future of Europe must be conducted in a very responsible manner if it is not to end in failure, as happened with the intergovernmental method at Nice. We must recognise the legitimacy of the European citizenship of the citizens of the Member States, for this, too, will help to bring the European institutions closer to the citizens once again. Today, we have to take into account the way the interinstitutional organisations’ systems have developed, and the more sophisticated this development becomes the more it widens the gap between the citizens and the institutions. When the institutions work properly, problems do not arise, but when they do not work properly – and the number of petitions we receive is evidence of the considerable gap between the institutions and the citizens – the citizens are wronged by the institutions. Our positive response must be to strengthen the institutions which safeguard the rights of the Union’s citizens. The Committee on Petitions has been forced to issue an extremely critical opinion on the Commission’s proposals on good governance, for it has found no reference in them either to the European Ombudsman or to the Committee on Petitions’ role as the institutional body which safeguards the rights of the citizens, who indeed petition it to uphold their rights. The proposals for good governance do not appear to contain any significant element that might succeed in bringing the citizens closer to Europe. This endeavour could be said to be effective in theory but, in actual fact, to have no genuine impact. Lastly, we hope that it will be possible to make the obscure role of the Council clearer, at least by advertising the institution’s sittings when it is legislating, to avoid the impression of it being a huge black hole. I recommend the points made in these reports to the other European institutions, for I am sure that Parliament is the only body with democratic legitimacy. IN THE CHAIR: MR PACHECO PEREIRAVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
I thank the Commissioner for his response. I regard consideration as positive and urge him to bring that forward. We know that two billion a day is still being spent on the military and on arms sales – 40% of it from Europe. All of us therefore have to be more effective in curbing this trade. I congratulate the Commission on what it has done in terms of implementing the Joint Action on small arms – the project in Albania. I urge the Commissioner to implement the project in Cambodia as soon as possible, and other projects which I know he and his services are considering in a former Soviet Republic and in a South African country. I hope that when we look at the review that is taking place in the Council at the moment, we will all be able to contribute in a way that will curb the arms trade and enable more money to be made available for development.

Political group: PSE
You will understand that I am not at all opposed to the liberalisation of port services, but I too would like to lodge my objection to the paranoid way in which the French army insists on protecting our parliament building against possible demonstrators at the moment. This is, after all, not a barracks or a military academy, this is a house of representatives, and parliamentarians are being refused access to their own Parliament in a particularly arrogant, insolent way by real machos. First they make you get out of the taxi or the car or the bus in the wrong place, and then when the taxi has gone, they tell you that you have to walk another 400 metres. There was not a single demonstrator to be seen anywhere nearby, only soldiers protecting a building and not the Members of Parliament. This is the umpteenth time the city of Strasbourg and the French Government have made it impossible to enjoy working here in Strasbourg. Either our flights are being cancelled or our cars are being taken away, and now we are even being denied access to our own Parliament. I think that you must do something about this. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, there is no reason to doubt the good democratic and legal policy aspects that are behind these reports and, in particular, the recommendation on the future development of Europol. I would, however, question both the realism of the proposal and its political wisdom. Since the proposal’s ambitions cannot be realised on the basis of the existing treaties, those tabling the proposal have taken their arguments from the expectations of the European Convention, the aim of which is clearly – as has been said several times – to transfer these topics from the intergovernmental pillar 3 to supranational regulation. A supranational Europol is nothing less than a federal police force. It is both an objective of, and a means of establishing, a European federal state. The logic behind Europol is a lesson in EU integration. Random parts of the regulation that until now has been the responsibility of the national states are removed. Nations are forced to lift national border controls. Free movement opens up the borders to the best-functioning part of the internal market, namely cross-border crime. Consequently, Europol is created. In short: the federal state is built up by knocking down the national state. Without, as mentioned previously, doubting the good intentions behind it, as a Scandinavian I am convinced that the rights of control that we have over our Danish police – and which are far from satisfactory – do however serve democracy and the rule of law far more securely than any supranational system. The existing control arrangements with regard to data protection that it is proposed be continued are a parody of the rule of law. As a Northerner, I say that we can do better ourselves, at least while we have not yet squandered the whole of our heritage in terms of legal culture.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Malaysia could, in many ways, be a model for much of Asia, and indeed of Europe. When one considers the constitution created by the nation's wise founder, Tunku Abdurahman, under which the various states are in a federation, with the nine sultans electing a common Head of State every five years, and diverse races and religions living together without violence and largely without conflict, one might say that Malaysia had what it takes to be a model state, and, in economic terms as well, decades in succession saw repeated and outstanding development, despite the setbacks in recent years. It is, then, all the more dramatic a development that Mr Mahathir's regime is beginning to take on the characteristics of an autocracy. First he attempts to act against dissent in the name of politicised Islam. Then again, he misuses the fight against terrorism, and its Islamic variety in particular, to take further action against dissidents, albeit under another label. At one moment he tries to win worldwide acclaim as the representative of democracy; the next he is a brutal autocrat, withholding even the minimum rule of law. That is what is at stake with this Internal Security Act – that appropriate judicial review should have to take place; that proper evidence should have to be produced; that detention should be under proper conditions; and that the law should provide proper means of appealing against detention. Political detainees in Malaysia enjoy none of these things. It is for that reason that we have to make use of both the next EU-ASEAN summit and the next EU-ASIA summit to push energetically for a partner as important as Malaysia to respect human rights, return to its roots, renew the peaceful coexistence of the various religions and ethnic groups, and, at the end of the day, for the disappearance of the repressive measures that have been constantly stepped up in recent years, have resulted in a growing number of political prisoners, and are incompatible with Malaysia's status as one of the European Union's key partners.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the recent floods in Mozambique, followed by the hurricane, have thrown the country into complete disarray, at a time when it was just about recovering from the political atrocities of the past. It is sad that this should happen to one of the world’s poorest countries as well. Unfortunately, aid got under way relatively late in the day, at least according to the reports. Those images of people perched on rooftops and in trees, which were transmitted across the world, have naturally caused questions to be directed at the international community and the NGOs regarding the speed of action required to alleviate the worst of the emergency situation. Moreover, the world also witnessed how quickly South African helicopters were on the scene and how they saved a few thousand people as a result. I think it would be fitting to pay tribute to them for these efforts. Meanwhile, we have heard from Commissioner Nielson that a great deal more was done than was made known. We appreciate the fact that he travelled to Mozambique in person to assess the situation and to see what the EU could do in the way of aid. In my opinion, the programme which has now been drawn up in conjunction with the Mozambique government is a sound one, also because it is phased. It will first address emergency aid, then housing and infrastructure and after that structural aid in order to get the affected areas back on their feet. The funding which has been set aside for this project is considerable. I have heard that the international community has put one hundred million on the table in the meantime, and that the EU has made a disproportionate contribution to this. Moreover, I heard this morning that debts have most definitely been deferred but that it is to be examined how this will be dealt with in future. It would be good, of course, if these debts were actually suspended, for then the Mozambique government could use the funds for this purpose. Mr President, I am left with an uncomfortable feeling. The images which have been broadcast obviously do not reflect reality. Mr Van den Bos has also pointed this out. This means that the European Commission should consider whether the international intervention power which Mr Solana is busy setting up should not be supplemented with a kind of European intervention power for humanitarian aid, which acts quickly and which can also inform the media quickly on the work that is being done. The images were inadequate, the disaster is very sad indeed, but the European Union did not stand idly by, as was suggested. We most definitely provided support. I think it is only fair to clarify this here. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, echoing the thoughts of a number of Members, I should like to tell you that, two and a half months after the wreck, the situation remains particularly critical and every day the scale of the disaster becomes even more apparent. There are two aspects, the first being the environmental angle. The wreck still contains 16 000 tonnes of heavy gas oil which is leaking and, in addition to these leaks, unfortunately, last week we observed and counted 35 acts of ecological piracy, 35 degassing operations, disgracefully aggravating this already catastrophic situation. Mrs de Palacio expressed her views at length regarding this issue and I feel she set to work without waiting for an element which today is absolutely essential, a draft European maritime law, following a draft directive on the maritime transportation of dangerous goods. From this point of view, this fits in with the wish of the French to see their presidency characterised by regulations which work towards increasing safety. The secondary impact, however, is proving to be on the economy, the primary impact being environmental and only the second economic, as many Members have stated. Shellfish farming, fishing, oyster farming and fish farming are today seriously affected, for the effects of the oil slick have been compounded by the storm damage affecting many areas. Unfortunately, these sectors have been devastated: they have first to rebuild and then, perhaps the most difficult thing, to regain consumer confidence. Confronted with this situation, the inhabitants of Brittany, the Vendée and Charente, as well as the forestry workers in other regions, await a signal from the European Union. We cannot claim that rapprochement with the citizens is the touchstone of this legislative period if, at the same time, we hold our tongues and do not offer practical responses in the face of phenomena of this magnitude. I took very careful note of Commissioner Fischler’s remarks, perhaps the most practical suggestions we have heard to date. There have been many declarations of sympathy and solidarity, and many announcements, admittedly, but now it is time for expectations to be met with a tangible display of European solidarity.

Political group: PSE