GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it is clear that today may well turn out to be a historic day in this Parliament, possibly ushering in the end of one of the last buttresses of a totalitarian dictatorship in Europe. It is of course difficult to determine how long the Serbian population will need to continue fighting before Milosevic will actually disappear off the scene. A unanimous stance on the part of the Serbian population has proved extremely important, as it will continue to do so for the next couple of days and weeks. This means, at the same time, that the European Union too will very much need to form a united front. In this context, I deplore the fact that the Dutch Minister for Foreign Affairs, fortunately abandoned by almost all parties in the Lower Chamber, adopted a stance out of the blue which goes against the unity of the European Union and against the wishes of the opposition in Serbia. I believe this displays a lack of earnestness, and is at the same time insulting to his office. It also signals an excessive drive to stand out from the rest, to the point where the life of people could be at stake. I believe it is also important to establish at this time on what basis the High Representative and the Council will need to adopt their positions. Will it be by largest common denominator, or on the basis of a large majority in the Council, which should not be difficult to achieve with regard to this issue? In addition to establishing unity in the Union, this is also, of course, about recognising the fact that Kostunica has won the presidential elections. I wonder if the Commissioner has planned any steps in this respect to demonstrate that we really do consider Kostunica to be the only lawfully elected representative of the Serbian people, and the only partner with whom the European Union is involved as from today. Naturally it is difficult to mention budgets at this early stage. The High Representative explained this only a moment ago, but what we can do is to selectively lift sanctions by way of sending a message to the Serbian electorate. The neighbouring countries will take a great interest in this too. I hope that the Council, in conjunction with the Commission, will take clear measures in this respect in the short term. It is not easy to gauge Serbia’s future. As we have already witnessed all over Central Europe, constitutional states and democracy do not blossom automatically after a revolution. Nationalism does not automatically disappear if a democratically elected president can be found. We should therefore remain level-headed and focused in our attempts to create openings for a development which will bring Serbia nearer to Europe, also from a moral-political point of view.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the most striking statistic I have heard tonight is the one from the Commissioner when she indicated that it would take 2 500 years for us to reach a position of equality for women if we continue at the same pace. I wonder how much faster we need to move in order to achieve this equality within the next hundred years, which even then would be quite a long period to have to wait. It strikes me that while we talk consistently, and correctly, about the need to create equal opportunities in the European Union that in a very real sense that is a secondary objective to treating people with equality, because there is a distinct difference between the question of equality for every single human being and the idea that they should also have equal opportunities. Without equality there can be no equal opportunity and that has to be fundamental to our approach to this issue of women participating in decision-making. One of the issues that must be addressed if we are to ensure that women – and in particular working women – can participate and that they get time off work in order to pursue trade union activities, is that of employers being extremely reluctant to allow workers to have time off to pursue either training or trade union activities. This is increasingly the case, even before one deals with the question of allowing either men or women time off to have babies or to look after children. I am not surprised by the statistic which indicates that there has been a decline in the number of women participating in employers' organisations. The only slight criticism I would have of some of the statistics in the report is that they are out of date. That is not the fault of the rapporteur, it is down to the fact that we do not have consistent and systematic collection of proper data. One of the keys to making progress in this area is to have affirmative programmes, action plans and targets. Critical to it also is a programme of sensitising people in trade unions and in employers' organisations to the fact that there is another half of the human race who are entitled to equality as of right and not just as a privilege.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, from what I can gather from the first part of the Commissioner’s answer, the Commission is totally indifferent to the negative impact the damaged bridges over the Danube will have and is only concerned about how it can make use of this natural disaster – which it in fact helped to bring about – to overturn the legally and democratically elected leadership in Yugoslavia. This does not create a very good impression. It is in keeping with the more general policy which the European Union has pursued on this issue. I would like to hear the Commissioner’s views on this or perhaps some statement to the contrary if I have misunderstood what he said.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, thank you for the well-reasoned proposal of the rapporteur! In this context I would like to propose, in order once again to show the consequence of the proposals, a few follow-up measures, because it is not only e-mails which can be sent anonymously, but letters also. This is why all public post-boxes should be closed and it should only be possible to send letters at the post-office following official verification of ID. The second point concerns telephones, because telephone calls can also be made anonymously. All telephones should also be gotten rid of, except for a few telephone boxes which should, of course, be monitored by the police. Then all fax machines should be gotten rid of as quickly as possible – nothing else springs to mind!

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I have the following question to ask: we have just received the printed version of the texts adopted. We have received the bulky paper version with the numerous roll­call votes, but what is missing is the verbatim report of proceedings for yesterday’s topical and urgent debate. Topical and urgent subjects of major importance are being postponed until Thursdays, certainly not without good reason, but urgent topics also need to be dealt with urgently as well. We have taken the floor on many occasions. I recall the subject of Tibet being discussed on the Dalai Lama’s 65th birthday yesterday. The people are keen to hear that there was great unity here in the European Parliament, how this came about, and what the outcome of our debate was. It has happened before in my experience that we have only had one opportunity to avail ourselves of the verbatim report of proceedings for the Thursday topical and urgent debate, and that was on the Wednesday of the following week. Hence, the question: when will we receive the verbatim report of proceedings for these topical and urgent subjects of major importance?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President-in-Office of the Council, you said that there is a party in power in Austria which has made racist comments in public. Here in the European Parliament, people speak, not parties. In your reply to Mr Dupuis’ question, you referred to the fact that the sanctions approved by the Heads of State and Governments of fourteen countries were bilateral in nature. Can these sanctions also be stopped bilaterally? In other words, can an individual Member State decide to end the sanctions and resume normal working relations? If so, when will the Council officially release the citizens of Austria from this ordeal, which violates their democratic rights? Must each Member State individually abandon the sanctions before the Council comes to its senses and overturns the decision?

Political group: PPE-DE
chairman of the Committee on Budgets. – Mr President, there is no point in talking about old money or new money when there is no money! (Laughter) If we do not get agreement on this matter this year with urgent procedure, there will be no money next year for the Global Health Fund. I know there are problems about getting EUR 60 million from the EDF but, quite frankly, that is another argument. If we want EUR 60 million from the general budget, we have to agree to using urgent procedure on this or there will be no money for the Global Health Fund.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner Byrne, I recall how we discussed foot and mouth disease at the Brussels conference all of a year ago, when I was still Chairman and followed what you had to say on the monitor. I must say that our positions have now grown closer together, whereas at that time they were still rather more divergent. I explained the position of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, which was that a policy of culling and keeping countries free of the disease would not enable us to solve this problem. At that time, the Commission still took another view. I concede that the international organisations took yet another line on the question of when inoculation should take place. Now we have moved on a bit, and I call that progress. I believe that targeted vaccination will enable us to limit the damage, in material but also in cultural terms. The scandals associated with foot and mouth disease and the burning pyres gave the world an image of Europe that we must not allow to be repeated. Let me just say something on the subject of prophylaxis. I am not in favour of constant prophylactic vaccination, but we must also make it clear that control vaccination always amounts to prophylactic vaccination. The right time for this has to be identified, and this is where the Commission has to watch out. We also have to give the Member States leeway to enable us to have ring-vaccination and control vaccination at an early stage. That does not, however, necessarily include ongoing prophylactic vaccination, to which I wish to express my opposition.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President it is later than any of us thought it would be when we were planning for this session so I shall be very brief indeed. One of the reasons why we are late is because we spent time earlier today rightly stating the rooted opposition of this Parliament to any form of xenophobia or racism. This directive is, of course, not in itself directly about that. It is about attending to the needs of the internal market, creating flexibility and behaving in a reasonable and flexible way to enable the employment of third country persons both as employees and self-employed. That is in itself also about avoiding being unduly restrictive towards the stranger simply because he or she is a stranger. We welcome that, and because we think it makes a sensible and proper provision, we will support the most liberal version which we understand to be consistent with the law.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the FFH directive is an issue which has concerned us for some time now and we are currently experiencing a few teething problems. However, to begin let me say the following: the FFH directive is an important directive and creates a new climate in Europe for the protection of nature, the environment and birds. I would not want to change or spare anything in achieving this. I also find it encouraging that the Commission is consequently taking care that EU legislation is being implemented. All the same, in the case of the FFH directive the question arises as to whether the legislation which we have adopted is actually implementable and I can see obvious weak points. As I see it, the FFH directive is an instance where the legislation is not matched to the feasibilities of the regions. I see a problem in the various legal interpretations in the Member States due to the partially unclear definitions in the EU legislation, whilst, on the other hand, there is a lack of strong subsidiary aspects and approaches. Revision of the FFH directive, including the current difficulties in implementation, should not, I think be excluded. Alongside this general criticism of the FFH directive, however, I also see a particular problem with the amalgamation of the EU environmental and structural policies. Article 12 of the structural funds regulation adopted on 21 June 1999 provides for the possibility of sanctions in the event of violations in the following areas: implementation of environmental legislation, breaches of public contracts and failure to observe equality between men and women. To date, the Commission has only threatened sanctions in the case of the FFH directive. Does it also intend to initiate sanction mechanisms in the other areas? In my opinion, this is a very problematic course of action. The EU has a quite different means of enforcing sanctions, i.e. the European Court of Justice. The possible cutting or withholding of money from the Structural Fund is a form of sanction whose effect on the regions concerned cannot just be disregarded. What will happen with projects which are already under way and what will happen, above all, in those cases where a region does not receive any money from the Structural Fund? What sanctions will the Commission then impose for non-implementation of EU environment law? That the Commission is also totally unsure is shown by the fact that it initially wanted to include the entire state in the sanctions, then only a region, as you pointed out to Environment Minister Trittin, Commissioner. I would ask that we make this point absolutely clear here.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am the rapporteur who was in the same position last month. But what I cannot understand right here and now is this: we have nailed our colours to the mast and made a decision. What are the representatives of the Council in this Chamber here for, anyway? They should at least tell us now how they stand in relation to this, before we carry on voting. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I wish to express my support and the support of my group for the rapporteur and the amendments retabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. The Council's common position improved the methods of traceability for consumer products, cooperation between authorities, producers and distributors in taking action to withdraw and recall dangerous products, and the opening up of the rapid alert system to the applicant countries. I am very pleased that it has now been made clear that charity shops, car-boot sales and flea-market stalls will not be harmed by this directive as, by their very nature, they cannot provide information on product risk and product origin for second-hand goods. I support the Environment Committee's retabled amendments, in particular the specific reference to the precautionary principle, to market monitoring and the European product safety network. I strongly oppose exempting provisionally banned products from the export ban. This would be double standards and would go against the very aim of the directive. If there is concern about the safety of a product, then how can we justify exporting it to third countries? As the rapporteur said earlier: safety should be assured for all consumers, not just those in the European Union. I agree with the need for a fair balance between ensuring that products put on the market are safe and that the measures proposed can be practically implemented – this directive can achieve that.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, I wish to express thanks to you, the rapporteur and my Scottish colleague, Bill Miller, for bringing matter before the Petitions Committee. The issue of silicone gel breast implants is a sensitive one and this debate, as many have said this evening, is long overdue. That is why we in the Environment Committee wanted to see access for all patients to free comprehensive information drawn up by independent experts, clear, bold health warnings in advertising, and an end to the before-and-after-pictures frequently used in women's magazines. We in the Environment Committee believe that all breast implant operations should be recorded in the EU and that, as a result, manufacturers should supply only to surgeons who use such a register. The cost of breast implants should include precare, independent advice, alternatives, a cooling-off period and post-care. Finally, there should be comprehensive national lists of registered private clinics and trained plastic surgeons. I am glad to see that he rapporteur has taken on much of the Environment Committee's opinion and I thank her for that.

Political group: PSE
The Luxembourg process introduced a new way of working within the EU. It involved taking new initiatives to strengthen employment policy in the Union. After five years, we can now say that this strategy has been successful, even if there is still much to be improved. The open method of coordination is not based on legislation, but on common policy objectives. This has proved to be an effective method of managing employment issues. Parliament does not have co-decision in the open coordination. A role that is based on co-decision, which is now required in recital R in the adopted report, would undermine open coordination as a method. As a Swedish Christian Democrat I cannot support this. Recital E in the report also criticises the entrepreneurship pillar, stating that the emphasis on small and medium-sized enterprises has been too narrow a perspective. This statement is in direct contradiction of the political priorities of the in Sweden. For this reason also, I have not been able to support the report.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I believe that this debate is appropriate at the end of the five-year period for which MEDA was programmed, but I also believe that we are going to have time to discuss this new regulation, which at the moment is being debated in this House. What I mean to say is that, in any event, I share the Commission’s concern and I think the proposal to simplify the procedures is a positive one. I hope that this Parliament will support it. In the few seconds allocated to me, I will simply refer to two aspects which I believe should be dealt with urgently in relation to the MEDA programmes. Firstly, decentralised cooperation and the activities generated by the Barcelona Process between the most active social operators from the non-Community Mediterranean countries and the European Union. These are projects, which, as well as having intrinsic value, create growth in the social sectors in these countries. It seems essential to me, since we want an area of free trade and prosperity, and since we also want to push decisively for democratisation in this area in the southern Mediterranean, that we support the men and women who are trying to work in this field. We must put an end to the poor esteem in which they currently hold the Union and we must once again ensure that their expectations and ambitions are supported by the Union. I believe furthermore that the Commission must have sufficient human and material resources to do so. The second issue which concerns me is the inclusion of immigration in the regulation. I am concerned about how this issue will be dealt with in the Mediterranean area. We must not only create agreements on the readmission clauses, and not only provide resources for guarding borders. We must also, by means of imagination and new measures, create the capacity for co-partnership with these countries, so that we can adopt a legal approach to the issue of immigration and so that people do not simply feel that we have closed the border to them but that they can move freely within this free trade area.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I want to welcome Articles 5 and 6 of the draft regulation, which give a positive signal to Member State governments to support special arrangements for so-called reasonable accommodation to promote the employment of disabled workers. However, I want to ask Commissioner Monti, in replying to the debate, to address the 400 000 disabled workers, such as those at Remploy in Southend in my constituency – and in other workplaces throughout Europe – where the company employs more than 50% of disabled workers unable to work in the open labour market. This is known as sheltered or supported employment. I know the Commissioner has received representations from the General, Municipal and Boilermakers Trade Union and many others that the actual organisational, administrative and transport costs of such companies should also be exempted from the state aid rules. I understand that the advisory committee on state aids has given an initial sympathetic response to this proposal. Tonight I hope the Commissioner will reassure this Parliament and those many disabled people who are unable otherwise to attain a job in the open workplace that Europe will fully recognise their rights and their aspirations in its competition rules.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly has set itself the objective of eradicating poverty in these regions of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, which must be rescued from their wretchedly poor situation. That is Europe's duty, as a rich continent, but I am convinced that it is also in its interest. In his very comprehensive report, our rapporteur Johan Van Hecke rightly condemns the prevailing anarchy, the result of armed conflicts that cause endless bloodshed in some of these regions, as one of the causes of this poverty. He has rightly included the establishment of a peace force in his list of remedies to this situation, without this interfering in the internal affairs of all these countries, which are jealous of their independence. Given my experience in this field, allow me to go into this point a little further. We have moved beyond the age of military intervention by European contingents, not so much because this smacked of neo-colonialism as because the recent interventions by the international community, whether under the UN mandate or as a result of multilateral agreements, have shown the need to take a more regional approach to crises. If we want to make a really useful contribution to keeping or restoring peace, we need a deeper knowledge of the history, culture and even language of the country in which we are to intervene. That is why regional conflict-management mechanisms have been set up and must continue to be examined and developed, with the help of the European Union. They must gradually take on responsibility for measures in the field, as part of a common strategy, coordinated between the Member States and the ACP countries themselves, and it is up to our Parliament to continue to define these measures and to play a more active part in monitoring their implementation. In that respect, our rapporteur also deserves credit for proposing a very exhaustive list of the approaches and measures that can and must be adopted.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I do not wish to hold up the ceremony. With all this gratitude having been expressed, I should just like to thank the members of the Sittings Service, who have worked hard to ensure that the votes were taken quickly and efficiently. (Applause)

Political group: PSE