GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I am absolutely delighted that Mr Prodi and the Commission are giving priority to sustainable development. Nevertheless, I would like to say that, in this regard, there is an issue which is never discussed and which I believe is a part of European tradition, an issue which we should take into account: man. We are always talking about the biodiversity of nature, but we do not take account of the fact that, within our programmes in general, there is a lack of projects and working programmes concerning man’s environment: both the natural environment and, above all, the urban environment, where man actually lives. Sustainability must take account of the fact that, in today’s world, we cannot draw a distinction between the artificial setting and the natural setting. The city is an artificial setting which is just as important as a natural setting. We must bear in mind that we cannot allow our heritage to be destroyed, our cities to be destroyed, the environment to be destroyed, without calculating the consequences for man. The city is the setting for the greatest injustices, it is the setting which we must take care of in order to prevent marginalisation. Therefore, if we do not introduce the urban environment and the historic environment, which have made up our European identity, we will lose a great part of our personality. Salvador de Madariaga said that man is the only tree which picks up its roots and walks. Well, I believe this is an important issue which we must take into account; that there is a rootlessness in our society; that we must take account of the settings in which man lives, because that is where the greatest environmental problems take place, as well as the greatest cultural problems. Therefore, let us look after that environment and bear in mind that, although the biodiversity of ways of life and settings is important, I believe that the European Union is currently moving away to a large extent from sustainability, in the sense that only gigantic projects are given massive funding, as in the case of the URBAN project. One of the principles of sustainability is to deal with issues at the smallest level. That, ladies and gentlemen, is what I ask in order to achieve sustainability.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it would be hard to deny that, for some years now, the social policies of the States of the Union have been conditioned by economic and monetary policies, by budgetary concerns, by the Stability Pacts and by the flexible and precarious nature of employment, in homage to the great god of the marketplace and to competition, his inseparable companion. The divide between those who have much and those who have little or nothing is growing ever wider, while, precisely in the name of these sacred principles, those who have much are exacting increasing sacrifices from those who have little or nothing. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, with its constant referral to national laws and practices for the actual implementation of social rights, is liable to render irreversible this subordination, this unfair system of the wealthy few, this model of a liberal free trade society which is rising like a phoenix from the ashes of European social democratic ideals with striking speed. This Charter on social rights is a step backwards compared to the laws of many of the Member States and, thanks precisely to the referrals to these laws, it will serve as a tool to alter them or limit their effectiveness. Civil and political rights are empty, formal rights if they are merely listed in a document and not based on actual social rights. It appears that the century which is coming to a close, with all its battles to emancipate the under-privileged social classes, has been in vain and has taught us nothing. We cannot pretend that this Charter is an initial step towards a Union based on increasing solidarity. Rather, it is the bare minimum in terms of future social policies. I only hope that it will not be incorporated into the Treaties and that movements calling for a fairer Europe, in which there is a genuine increase in solidarity, will flourish in civil society, in the trade unions and in political organisations.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioners, we in Flanders have been dreaming of being Flemish and of becoming European since the nineteenth century. With the accession of ten new countries, the European area of peace and stability is growing, and so is the scope for human rights and democracy. This is a reason to rejoice. Candidate countries were given powerful incentives to bring about the necessary changes. We, however, have not shown the same level of commitment to forcefully implementing the changes that are necessary to fashion this real Europe. Former enlargements have shown that prosperity has increased, both in the countries concerned and for EU citizens. Mr Prodi has stated that the costs will be reimbursed, but our citizens are not all convinced of this. Quite the reverse. It will require courage and powers of persuasion to remove the feelings of uncertainty and fear, particularly at a time of economic decline. Moreover, there are still flaws in the system. Mr Prodi himself mentioned fraud, corruption and the trafficking in human beings. The problems surrounding Cyprus and Poland's internal problems were also mentioned, and the discussion on Turkey is overshadowing everything else. We should not arouse false expectations. Hence the need for us to inform our citizens of what is at stake. We as regionalists and peoples without a state are very sensitive to the problems that still exist with regard to discrimination against peoples and cultural minorities. We are sensitive to the non-recognition of regional and historical realities in the different accession countries. All of this raises the question of whether we still have the time and resources to put these things right before accession becomes a reality. However, we are giving accession the green light today because a red light would be a sign of hostility, while we are, quite rightly in fact, dreaming of this area of peace and stability.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Where security is concerned, there can be neither exemptions nor lax tolerance. Maritime transport needs to be dissociated from the laws of maximum profit and another International Maritime Organisation created capable of respecting social needs, workers and the environment. There need to be more regulations and more coercive international laws, and a ban placed on the system of ports of convenience. The loss of the oil tanker Prestige scarcely a year ago, together with its human, social and environmental consequences, remind us each day, from La Coruña to Calais, of these necessities. My priority in this area is not the fight against terrorism but that against the maritime hooligans. I have supported all the amendments aimed at including in the regulation the strengthening of security measures in Community ports, at covering all the personnel concerned, not only seafarers but also all professionals working on a casual basis in port areas, and at extending the scope of the regulation to include ships transporting containers, petroleum products and dangerous materials. For these reasons, I have voted in favour of this report. – Paasilinna report (A5-0353/2003)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, I just wanted to explain that this directive on a uniform bus for Europe was rejected by all groups at first reading. Then there were 90 pages; today there are 150. That is why the European People’s Party has brought in Amendment No 9. I support referring this draft directive back to committee because, after the standardisation of the European cucumber, we do not want the standardisation of the European bus as well. I call on my colleagues to vote against it. (Applause from the right) (The President declared the common position approved as amended) *** Report (A5-0025/2001) by Mrs Müller, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to food supplements [COM(2000) 222 – C5­0234/2000 – 2000/0080(COD)]

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we are talking about the finances of the countries that have adopted the euro. I voted in favour, I am for the euro, but – today, now, before I wish everyone, including you, Mr President, the interpreters and the ushers, ‘Bon appétit’ – I should like to highlight something. It would be good if the governments of the countries that have adopted the euro took care – something they have not done so far – that unscrupulous traders, profiteers who only think of themselves, do not raise the prices of consumer products that are bought by citizens, workers and pensioners, that is, people on fixed incomes. Indeed, taking advantage of the fact that in the changeover from the national currency to the European currency, the euro, people are not yet used to the value of the new money, as is certainly the case in Italy and I believe also in other countries in the European Union, there has been a disproportionate rise in the cost of products that are mainly bought by the least well-off, especially pensioners and citizens with what is, I regret to say, a modest income.

Political group: PPE-DE
Adopting the directive on the initial qualification and periodic training of drivers of certain road vehicles for the carriage of goods or passengers will provide the EU with a crucial weapon in the fight to prevent road accidents involving heavy vehicles. Portugal has always stood out from other Member States where road fatality statistics are concerned. In 2001 alone, there were more than 42 500 accidents, with around 5 800 causing death and serious injury. A large proportion of these accidents is caused by vehicles carrying passengers or heavy goods. I therefore welcome this report, which contributes to improving road safety on the one hand through new technologies such as driving simulators and, on the other, through ongoing training courses for professional drivers. My only regret is that this directive applies only to new drivers starting in the profession five or six years after the directive’s entry into force. Bearing in mind the profession’s accident rate and its difficulties in attracting new members, I feel that these timescales are too long. I also agree with drivers being given specific training as a means of combating the scourge of organised crime, illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on 30 August last year, an important decision was made. On the eve of Cancún, the United States, the EU and the developing countries agreed to flesh out paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration, which has to do with the production of medicines for developing countries undergoing serious health crises. The agreement is not brilliant, but it is a start, although we now have to think about implementing it. I have meanwhile gleaned from the press that the United States is backtracking from it. That is why now is the time for the European Union to take a few convincing steps. So far, though, the European Union is showing little initiative. An opportunity to carry out in practice the decision of 30 August was recently lost with the review of legislation on pharmaceuticals. The Commission appears to be of the opinion that this matter belongs in Community and national patent legislation, but that is insufficient. The Community patent is still some way off and does not involve existing patents. Moreover, the Community patent does not affect data protection in any way. The health crisis in Africa is an urgent problem. Last month, it became known that AIDS has claimed five million casualties over the past year. It is beyond me why the EU has not so far been prepared to do what the EU agreed upon prior to the Conference of Cancún. Commissioner, what I want to know from you is when the European Union will have taken the legal measures in order to speed up the production of generic medicines for developing countries. What pledges can you make to Parliament today?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, following this vote, I would like to ask the competent Commissioner, Mr Byrne, if, now that he has seen how much support there is in this Chamber, he is prepared to adopt the proposed amendments?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, this Council report deserves credit and there is every reason to compliment the Finnish Presidency on its commitment, although I have to add that I deplore the fact that the Finnish presidency delegation has just left the Chamber. There are mainly three reasons why I welcome the publication of this report. Firstly, it is based on a coherent vision, a vision which rejects a hierarchy of types of human rights, but which emphasises their very interdependence. The report also makes a first attempt to create coherence between the external and internal human rights policy of the European Union, especially the latter being a real innovative step. It has to be said that, compared to Parliament, the Council appears to be leading the way. Secondly, the report does not fall into the trap of presenting human rights as a European achievement but presupposes universality and adopts a global approach with a great deal of attention being paid to the EU’s action within the scope of the United Nations. Thirdly, the report is the product of an organised dialogue with the social organisations involved in human rights issues. The forum held here in Brussels over the past couple of days deserves a regular spot in the Union’s consultative network. There are, however, also a few minus points to be noted. The attempt within the EU to include self-evident human rights issues in the report is very biased to say the least. Why does discrimination on account of race or ethnic origin receive preferential treatment over, for example, discrimination against women and homosexuals, which does not feature or hardly features as an issue at all? Could this be a taste of how the Council will handle the package of anti-discriminatory measures which the Commission proposed last week? Why is no attention being given to other human rights issues prevalent within the Union, such as abuse in prisons or at police stations, killings by armed political groupings and the situation of conscientious objectors, to name only the most obvious issues? The Council needs to summon up the political courage to spend more time on the internal human rights situation within the EU in the next annual report. In this context, the proposal for a so-called “observation centre” must also be kept on the agenda. After all, experience has taught us that collecting and analysing information is a prerequisite to achieving a sound human rights policy.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the Recommendation for which President Gil-Robles is rapporteur is particularly timely given that the European Convention is meeting. Why? For a politically very important reason, I believe: if we want to launch any initiative or send any message to strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the European Parliament, we must do so now. Every day and every week we are hearing all types of messages which argue that the composition of this House leads to democratic deficit. It is said for example that the democratic deficit must be overcome by strengthening the national parliaments’ capacity to act within the processes of European construction. It is even said openly that the citizens believe that the national Members of Parliament truly represent them rather than European ones, forgetting that they both derive their legitimacy from the same source: universal suffrage and the political will of the citizens as expressed through the ballot box. I therefore believe it very positive that there should be an improved uniform electoral procedure for the election of Members of the European Parliament. I would also stress issues which I believe to be essential, such as, for example, the proportional system which directly represents the opinion of the citizens and guarantees plurality; the fact also that parity is asked for – at the moment there are as many female voters as male ones, more even – and the political parties formed on the basis of the will of the citizens, and not only this Parliament, must also show that parity. Finally – and why not? – we should insist that the person who is elected, when the time comes, by the European Parliament as President of the Commission, should also be put to the people as a candidate to the European Parliament. So congratulations. You have my full support.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I am sure there is not much we can do about tight schedules and fixed commitments, but if you had explained to the House from the Chair that Commissioner Fischler would have to be on board a plane by a certain time and for certain reasons, I am sure we could have avoided this conflict, because everyone would have seen sense. However, if you simply inform us that is how things are, you are bound to provoke some resistance from Members of this House, and quite rightly so, because it is an offence to our dignity! We are not content for our views to be put to one side – we want to be involved in this decision, and we want to know what is going on. If you can take that on board, then I think we can have a reasonable dialogue with each other.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Olsson has presented an excellent report on the subject of the use of hormones in stockfarming. Food safety must take priority in all our decisions because consumers have a right to safe, risk-free food. Substances with a hormonal or thyrostatic action and beta-agonists as growth promoters in beef production have long-term effects and may therefore have repercussions on human health. The main persons affected by hormone residues are high-risk groups such as pre-pubertal children and pregnant women. During the WTO dispute settlement procedure, the scientific committee came to the conclusion from its evaluation of the risks of the six hormones that oestradiol 17β clearly had a carcinogenic, tumour-initiating and genotoxic effect. If there is the slightest suspicion that an individual substance may have harmful effects, as is the case with oestradiol 17β, then we must react with a definitive ban. We are also duty bound to be cautious with the other hormones at issue if we are to have a high level of food safety and health protection. Compliance with the hormone ban must also be strictly controlled within the European Union. European consumers are also extremely sensitive when it comes to imported products, which is why the monitoring system for meat imports from third countries must be reviewed. Only if we apply the precautionary principle can we show consumers that we mean business when we talk of food safety in Europe. That is how Parliament can send out a clear signal and pave the way forward.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first I would like to present my compliments to the rapporteur, Mr Dary, because he has chosen the path of resistance and not renunciation on this complex issue. Indeed, we find the Commission’s new proposal unacceptable, because it makes unacceptable concessions to the multinationals of Latin America. Is there anyone in this Parliament unaware of the role played by these multinationals in financing American campaigns? Is anyone here unaware that the food safety conditions involved in the production of these bananas are dubious to say the least, and the social conditions are dominated by total disregard for the rights of men, women and children? Who can ignore that by bending to the diktat of the United States – under cover of the WTO – the European Union would throw 35 000 of its own nationals in the Canaries and over 30 000 in the French overseas territories out of work? Because, ladies and gentlemen, adopting a ‘tariff only’ system after a transitional period of six years, as the Commission proposes, would truly condemn our producers to failure and despair. That is why, like Mr Dary, I urge the maintenance of quotas and I oppose automatic passage to the tariff system, because, for my part, I refuse to sacrifice our producers in Martinique or Guadeloupe on the altar of a liberalisation beyond all regulation. Ladies and gentlemen, let us make no mistake, if Europe surrenders on the banana issue today, it will surrender on sugar or rum tomorrow, and the next day it will have to abandon its social model and its development policy. That is why I want to tell Commissioners Fischler and Lamy, in all seriousness, that, while I understand their legitimate desire to put an end to this dispute, they cannot do it at the expense of the poorest citizens in the European Union. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
The Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy unanimously approved the report by Mrs Rothe on the Council common position on the directive on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources (RES) in the internal electricity market. The common position adopted in March differs considerably from the position Parliament adopted at first reading last November, even though the Council has accepted about one third of Parliament’s proposed amendments. The rapporteur went to great lengths to achieve a compromise before the second reading in the EP and explained to the committee that the Council had agreed to eight of the nine compromise amendments during the trialogue held on Tuesday, 19 June. The only outstanding point was whether waste incineration should be regarded as a renewable energy source. The Council wants to include it. Members, however, have pointed out that the support given to renewable energy sources must be compatible with the other Community objectives, in particular the principle of 'respect for the waste treatment hierarchy'. That is why the incineration of non-separated household waste should not be promoted under this directive and under a future support system for renewable energy sources. Where the two legislative bodies disagreed most profoundly was on the question whether the national targets for the use of renewable energy sources should be mandatory or merely indicative. In November, Parliament called emphatically for mandatory targets, but the Council was opposed. The compromise stipulates that if the Member States have not made progress towards achieving their national indicative objectives, the Commission shall present proposals that may contain mandatory targets. The national indicative targets must be consistent with the global indicative target of 12% of gross national energy consumption by 2010 from renewable energy sources. At the same time, these renewable energy sources must account for a 22.1% indicative share of total Community electricity consumption. (Explanation cut short pursuant to Rule 137 of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the document tabled by Mr Chichester addresses the issue of energy supply and, in places, advocates the use of nuclear energy. I have already stated on a number of occasions that both I personally and the Pensioners’ Party are in favour of using nuclear energy. I would like to stress, in particular, before this House, that I feel the candidate countries’ nuclear power stations should be allowed to operate at full capacity. In my capacity as a member of the joint EU-Bulgaria interparliamentary committee, I recently visited the Bohunice power station in Slovakia and the Kozloduy power station in Bulgaria. Where their reactors meet certain safety requirements, these States should be allowed to use nuclear energy, for they do not have the economic resources to sustain an additional unnecessary cost just so they can replace one type of energy with another. Where nuclear power stations are safe, we must allow them to be used, particularly those in the candidate countries.

Political group: PPE-DE