GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I also congratulate Commissioner Lamy for agreeing to conduct this debate, which we proposed. He regrets, however, that it could not finally be resolved, as the central hypothesis was not accepted by the majority parties, the Group of the and the Group of the European People’s Party . Some of my fellow Members have already commented here on the huge importance of the textile and clothing industry in the European Union, but it should be remembered that this industry is concentrated above all in southern European countries, in less prosperous regions. I am thinking in particular of two significant areas in Portugal, Covilhã and the Ave Valley. It must also be borne in mind, however, that after enlargement we will have to add almost 600 000 more jobs to the two million already included in this sector, and many hundreds of thousands more in areas of industrial production such as Germany and Italy. We all know that restructuring in this sector has already led many firms to relocate to the east of Europe or to African or Asian countries, and that this has led to an increase in unemployment in the European Union. We also know that we cannot do without a full evaluation of the social, economic and territorial effects both of the bilateral agreements already signed and of possible greater liberalisation after the current Agreement on Textiles and Clothing expires at the end of next year. For these reasons, then, we believe that it is essential to adopt an action plan introducing practical measures aimed at maintaining a harmonious, efficient production line. Support for SMEs, research and professional training should also be increased. During the current Doha agenda negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), however, it is essential that specific features of the textile and clothing sector be taken into account. In particular, reciprocity should be guaranteed in future agreements and trading relations between the European Union and third countries in this sector. The European textile industry can no longer be used as a bargaining chip in other negotiations on the service or hi-tech sectors. In order to maintain rates of employment and development throughout vast areas of the European Union, customs duties must be kept at their current levels, which are in any case among the lowest in the world. Neither fresh cuts nor the removal of non-tariff barriers must be accepted in this sector, except on a reciprocal basis, always taking the tariffs actually imposed as a starting-point rather than those made known to the WTO. I attach the greatest importance to the establishment of some sort of watchdog, made up of representatives of employers, employees and the Commission, to monitor how the situation develops. This body would function as an early warning system designed to bring any problems arising to a speedy resolution.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, there can be no denying that especially since the events of 11 September stronger measures have been needed to combat terrorism, but it should equally go without saying that any measures that we implement need to have a legal basis. The United States on 5 March enacted a law that has indisputable consequences for the citizens of the European Union, for data protection and for EU legislation. The US enacted this law without concluding the necessary bilateral or multilateral negotiations and without entering into an agreement with the Union. This – as you yourself indicated, Commissioner – has led to a problem with the airlines, which are caught in a double bind. If they do not pass on any data, they have difficulties over landing rights, leading to business problems. But if they do pass on the data as required, they run the danger of infringing EU law and being taken to court. So a horrendous problem has arisen here. This procedure is quite simply unacceptable. The Commission is not, however, immune from criticism here, because it has been aware of this issue for 15 months and has had ample time to tackle this problem, to consult Parliament and to seek appropriate solutions. An opportunity has been missed here – yesterday was the first time we were informed of this. We now find ourselves in the position of debating something that has been in force for some time now and which involves data on our citizens being transferred to the United States without our having any real guarantees about how this data is used in practice. Something else I am critical of is the fact that the negotiations have not been held at political level but that officials have been given the remit of reaching agreement on this, and that this has then virtually been presented to us as the legal basis for all these processes, and the citizens of the European Union have been expected to put up with this. This too is totally unacceptable. What we expect and indeed demand is that those responsible should be held to account for allowing a situation in which data is now being passed on from the European Union without any legal basis. We in the Group are also calling for the scope for an action in the European Court of Justice to be investigated, and we are demanding in particular, and with immediate effect, that anything that has been illegally enacted and is now in force should be rectified. However, we also expect that cooperation with the United Nations in the fight against terror should continue, but on a proper legal footing. We all know that we can only win the war on terror by means of international cooperation. We are therefore committed to cooperation with the United States, but let me make this clear once more – only if our rights are defended! (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, at this point I would like to return to the two points on which we are critical of the Commission proposal. The first is the issue of dual optionality in the allocation of refugees from civil wars, that is to say the possibility that a refugee has to select a country, and a country's right to reject any refugee. The founding fathers created the ‘European home’ as a place for solidarity, above all. This solidarity can still be seen today, for example when European funding is used to support structurally weak regions. So not only is the call for more equitable burden sharing as regards receiving refugees justified, but also burden sharing itself is an expression of solidarity between the peoples of Europe. As various Members have already pointed out, only a few Member States bore a share of the burdens resulting from the civil wars in former Yugoslavia. It is all very easy for Mrs Frahm to talk big, because she comes from a country which has not, so far, exactly distinguished itself when it comes to such acts of solidarity. Unlike the governments at the Nice Summit, we, as directly elected Members of the European Parliament, are obliged here to overcome national differences and to opt for a European solution founded upon a quota-based allocation of refugees in accordance with Member States' absorptive capacity. Otherwise, dual optionality will render the positive approach adopted in the Commission's proposal superfluous. The second important point is family reunification. Here, too, a fundamental principle of our Community is at stake – subsidiarity. Today it will be decided whether the EU should reserve for itself, in a centralist way, the process of defining and regulating what constitutes a family, or whether in the first place the concept of a nuclear family, which is common to all Member States, should be taken as a basis, with regulations going any further than that being at Member States' discretion. The compromise amendment tabled by the rapporteur, Mr Wiebenga, provides for the latter. This follows this House's tradition of fighting the attempts of the Brussels bureaucracy to arrogate to itself the powers of the Member States. Today, you have a chance to demonstrate what this concept of subsidiarity means to you. I urge you to vote for the fair traditions of this House and for the fundamental principles of our Community of values, and not to be swayed by purely national interests and party political calculations. I urge you, when it comes to these important issues, to vote for Mr Wiebenga's compromise amendments. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the text adopted at first reading in Mrs Villiers’ report does not amount to a significant improvement on the Commission’s text. Nonetheless, it does represent an acceptable compromise, and we would have been prepared to support it, had the second part of Amendment No 86 not been adopted. In view of the importance of the matter, it is most unfortunate that investment firms should in practice have been exempted from trading at the advertised prices. This runs counter to transparency. I would simply like to point out that no substantial majority was reached in the House in support of the text. This was the case both for Amendment No 86 and for the final text. I trust Mrs Villiers will take this into account. It is to be hoped that when the Council returns the text to Parliament for second reading the House will agree on a compromise acceptable to more Members.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, the Committee on Petitions gets a number of submissions to do with the lack of opportunities for immigration into Europe, and this is another reason why a directive on the subject is needed. Commissioner Vitorino, you are also right to say that, following this directive's entry into force, it will be left to the Member States to decide whether they want immigration, and if so, how much of it. But, by this proposal for a directive, you are putting down a marker to the effect that ‘immigration is a right.’ You, on Thursday, will not be returning to a country in which, at present, 4.6 million people are unemployed. Or, to put the question another way, are there schools in Portugal in which half the children do not understand Portuguese? It is true that we need rules on legal immigration, and that we have to control it, but it is also the case that our problems with the economy and education mean that we lack appropriate jobs for our own fellow-citizens. Despite its few tentative good points, the signal you are sending out by means of this directive is the wrong one, and it is being sent at the wrong time. For example, you also intend to grant a third-country national the right to immigrate even if he reveals the existence of a job that has been vacant for four weeks, and you, Mrs Terrón i Cusí, with your three-week period, want to undercut this proposal. This reminds me of a motor race in a James Dean film, in which the contest is to see who will be the last to jump out of a car heading for a precipice. Incidentally, the film's German title translates as ‘They know not what they do’. Despite high unemployment in Germany, there are still at present many positions that remain unfilled. One of the reasons for this is that the education system has been run into the ground. What you are now saying is, ‘do not worry about reforming your own country's educational system – we shall just get immigrants to do the jobs.’ – but that cannot be the solution! So let me repeat: the proposal is well-intentioned, but it sends the wrong signal, and, by the way, as you know, Commissioner, I take the view that the Convention has to be even bolder.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to express my support for Mr Bourlanges’s position regarding the amendment of the Financial Perspective. At the same time, I wonder how Finland, as the country to hold the Presidency, has clung to the untenable position of the Council, according to which world events do not influence the EU budgetary framework and the final sums fixed in the budget itself. In the same connection, I would also like to draw attention to the calls there have been to adopt financial support for European political parties. Our group, the Confederal group of the , has another stand in this matter. We do not want Europe’s taxpayers’ money to be spent on support for political parties. We would also like to see a revision of the pay and benefits enjoyed by MEPs by adopting a common rule, whereby MEPs do not receive unjustifiable expense compensations and everyone is paid a fair salary and remuneration.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, 50 years on we have been celebrating over the last few years the end of the war, the founding of the United Nations, the founding of the World Health Organisation, the return of independence to the Baltic Nations from the Soviet Empire, but sadly also 50 years on we have to commemorate China's illegal occupation of Tibet: fifty years of suppression and oppression of the Tibetan people by the Chinese regime. That must never be allowed to become a fait accompli hence the amendment to this resolution to put pressure on China, which I warmly support. Hence, also, the overall resolution to demand of the World Bank that it withdraw its support for our so-called project which would mean the movement of some 60,000 Chinese into an area currently populated by 4,000 Tibetans making a living with their herds, and the exploitation of Tibet's natural resources. Both actions are immoral, both are against international law, both demand action by this Parliament and this Union on behalf of Tibet and its people.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I wish to begin by saying how much I welcome this debate and I congratulate the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy on its initiative. We have an opportunity after the recent events to rebuild and improve the transatlantic relationship – that has to be the challenge we take on board. The summit at the end of this month will give us the opportunity – which we should grasp – to begin building that new future. We cannot allow the past to overshadow the future. However, we have to realise that dialogue must involve both sides of the Atlantic. My experience in the last 12 months has been that the United States has not been engaged or focused and, to some extent, we must make it understand how Europe operates and works at this moment. The legislative dialogue must be restarted. We almost had it, and the US pulled out at the last moment. However, I will not give up on that particular point. We must have an early-warning system in place to pinpoint areas of potential disagreement at the earliest possible moment. To achieve this we will require radical rethinking of how we have conducted our relations to date within the Commission and Parliament. I will use the meeting at the end of the month between Congress and the Members of this Parliament to further promote the dialogue and ensure that we can restart it. There is no point using excellent fine words that we put on paper if we do not have the follow-through on both sides of the Atlantic and if we do not deliver. That is the important point. Finally, we all have to take responsibility for what has happened and to shoulder a little of the blame. This Parliament has a central role to play in this and must take on board its responsibilities, but the Council and the Commission must give us greater cooperation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, this is the fiftieth time that my fellow MEP, Jens-Peter Bonde, has tabled this proposal. Could we not give him a program for his computer so that he does not have to write it out every time? It would make his work easier. (Parliament adopted the resolution) Report (A5-0251/2000) by Mrs Rühle, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets, on the draft ECSC operating budget for 2001 [COM (2000) 360 – C5-0340/2000 – 2000/2060(BUD)] (Parliament adopted the resolution) Report (A5-0236/2000) by Mr Colom i Naval, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets, on the Interinstitutional Agreement on financial statements (Parliament adopted the resolution) President. – I congratulate all our rapporteurs. I also congratulate the Chairmen of the Committees and everyone else who has actively contributed to this excellent result. (Applause) *** IN THE CHAIR: MRS LIENEMANNVice President Report (A5-0298/2000) by Mr Clegg, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on unbundled access to the local loop [COM(2000) 0394 – C5-0432/2000 – 2000/0185(COD)](Parliament adopted the legislative resolution)***Report (A5-0273/2000) by Mr Jové Peres, on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) 2200/96 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables, Regulation (EC) 2201/96 on the common organisation of the market in processed fruit and vegetables and Regulation (EC) 2202/96 introducing a Community aid scheme for producers of certain citrus fruits [COM(2000) 0433 – C5-0391/2000 – 2000/0191(CNS)]- Before the vote

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to congratulate Mrs Lynne most warmly, not just for the quality of the report she has presented to us, but also because she gave such careful consideration to the different proposals put to her. Every year, throughout the world and here in Europe, the fundamental rights of disabled people continue to be infringed in many ways. Even in Europe, the ill-treatment of disabled people is often a taboo subject, as is the very subject of disability itself. These problems affect real men and women but most importantly victims. Disabled people are vulnerable both physically and intellectually. This indicates the desirability of a legally-binding instrument and specific legal protection for disabled people the world over. I am, of course, very happy that this question is on the agenda of the United Nations. As was the case in respect of women and children, it is certainly now time for all the nations of the world to consider the protection of the fundamental rights of disabled people and the respect of these rights. Drawing up a convention would establish global reference points for drafting national policies and legislation. It would enable appropriate monitoring and control mechanisms to be put in place to ensure that the fundamental rights and dignity of disabled people are respected. We are aware that the Charter of Fundamental Rights outlaws discrimination on the grounds of disability and states that the integration of disabled people must be assured. Above all, however, the first article of the Charter affirms the right to human dignity. Europe is founded on the rejection of the differentiation, segregation and negation of people on any basis whatsoever. It is therefore essential that, in addition to the categories of rights we have established in this report, we establish the right to protection against any form of violence and the right to protection against cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. In this regard, I hope the European Commission will be in a position to put to Parliament a proposal for a comprehensive European Union directive on disabled people at some time in the future. The action we take in relation to disabled people must seek to combat not only violence and ill-treatment, but also the negation and infringement of disabled people’s most fundamental rights in their daily lives. To this end, I believe we must adopt pro-active policies to integrate disabled people into the whole of society on the same terms as any other citizens.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, my thanks to the Commissioner for his statement. In 1998, Commissioner, 530 000 children were infected with the AIDS virus in Sub-Saharan Africa. The startling contrast is that 1 000 children in total were infected by the virus in the whole of Western Europe and North America during that year. So we have to ask the question: why does such a discrepancy exist Why are there such stark contrasts in terms of the sheer scale of the poverty of people’s lives in Africa and, of course the resulting lack of proper health services, education, and AIDS treatments. Of course, as others have said, the neglect of Africa has very severe economic consequences. These include the suffering and death of productive members of their societies and, very importantly, the diversion of women away from employment towards the role as carers, and the diversion of resources in families and communities from savings to care, and indeed, as I am sure you are aware, to the endless funerals that you can witness in countries like Zimbabwe if you stand on a street corner. The time has come to invest in programmes that target more effectively the health needs of the people in Africa. It is, of course, ironic, as we mentioned in the Development Committee yesterday, that the Budget Committee voted last week to cut the budget line on reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS work by half from EUR 25 million to 12 million, and that we are now discussing the need for investment in this area. In rich countries, anti-retroviral therapies are extending the lives of significant numbers of people in wealthy nations. But I have to say that these solutions will never be affordable or accessible to the tens of millions of the world’s poorest people. I welcome the fact that the European Commission is placing increasing emphasis on giving resources to support the development of an AIDS vaccine. Only last week, as I am sure you are aware, the British development minister announced a very large investment in research for that vaccine. Early clinical trials will begin in January 2000 in the United Kingdom, and afterwards in Nairobi. In countries like Zimbabwe where 20% of the population are positive, vaccines, in my view, are the only hope. Meanwhile, in the short term, women are the key to progress. Adolescent girls in Sub-Saharan Africa are 6 times more likely to be infected than boys of their age. In a recent study in Kenya 25% of girls between 15 and 19 were HIV positive and 4% of boys. Women are literally silenced by ignorance, fear and stigma. Gugu Dlamini announced in a rally in Johannesburg last December that she was HIV positive. A week later, she was beaten to death by neighbours who said that she had brought shame to their community. That kind of situation, President, shames us all. (Applause)

Political group: PSE