GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
The accession of these 10 new Member States has to be supported by all those wishing to stabilise the continent as a whole, consolidate democracy and peace, strengthen the economy and sustainable development and be part of a cultural and human dimension based on shared values of freedom, respect for fundamental rights, good governance and the rule of law. These new Member States have a vital role to play in building an even stronger and more efficient European Union. This represents an unprecedented challenge on the political, economic and social levels. It also should be borne in mind that if this challenge is taken up, tremendous potential for strengthening and developing the European Union will be unleashed. We will indeed be able to aspire to a European Union speaking with one and the same voice on the world political stage and playing a leading role. I have no wish to hold up this historical process in any way. Nonetheless, if Amendment No 1, the second part of Amendment No 13 and Amendment No 19 are not adopted, I shall abstain. I will, however, vote in favour of the accession of each of the 10 candidate countries when it comes to the vote on the various recommendations. I trust this will help lay the best possible foundations for our shared future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, after the recent events in Dover, when 29 illegal Chinese immigrants suffocated to death, the tragedy of illegal immigration and the methods of responding to it have become a considerable problem, which the European Union must definitely tackle. This problem requires us to work on a particularly sensitive issue, that of shaping and harmonising a European immigration policy. This will be one of the major issues of the twenty-first century. The European Commission’s draft directive establishing the right to family reunification is perfectly timed, and I would like to congratulate the Commission particularly on this text, which was drawn up under the auspices of Commissioner Vitorino. The right to family reunification is crucial to normal family life. What is more, this right has long existed in the form of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to which all persons have the right to family life. But this is a particularly sensitive issue in view of the different laws existing in the various Member States, as it can come into conflict with notions of sovereignty. But that is the gauntlet that has been thrown down to the European Parliament, which must succeed in transcending these differences. The draft directive we are being asked to give our opinion on today is, in my view, a text of major importance, and it must receive the firm backing of the European Parliament. This text holds out real prospects for legal immigration, most of which is family immigration. As has already been said, this directive is the first example of this type of structure resulting from the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Tampere European Council, which is why it is so important. I would also like to point out that the modern world has many advantages, but for certain categories of people, including foreigners, there is a significant risk of exclusion. It is our duty as European democrats to be particularly diligent in this matter. The directive proposed by the Commission enables us to take a major step forward, under conditions that are entirely satisfactory, but with all the necessary guarantees. There has never been any question of authorising polygamous family groupings, contrary to what I have just heard. This is utterly false. Let us remember that this is the first text in the process of integrating the ‘justice and internal affairs’ pillar into community policy in the wake of the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Tampere European Council last November. Let us also remember that this is no more and no less than a matter of establishing the right to family reunification and that we must stop seeing family reunification as a privilege. As far as we are concerned, what is at stake is the construction of a Citizens’ Europe, something we are hoping and praying for in order to be able to continue to build Europe. It is up to us to seize this opportunity. Otherwise we will not succeed. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I too should like to start with a word of thanks to the two rapporteurs. I know that they have both worked hard on this topic from the outset. I should first of all like to turn my attention to the Bösch report. As the , we have tabled a few amendments to this report, to the effect that we consider mid-2002 somewhat premature as a firm deadline for a public prosecutor. In order to avoid any misunderstandings, we are clearly in favour of a public prosecutor, but mid-2002 is slightly too early. In our opinion, more attention should be devoted to the future Member States in Central and Eastern Europe and we would therefore ask the Court of Auditors to issue a report on this as soon as possible, thus enabling us to assess whether these countries are also capable of managing their financial affairs effectively before they accede. Furthermore, OLAF must obviously work closely together with similar organisations in the new Member States. We would also like to make our position clear on the Theato report: we are in support of a public prosecutor, but the lion’s share of the amendments that have been adopted in committee, in most cases by one majority vote, go too far in our view. At this stage, we prefer a directive to a regulation. We want to avoid a confrontation course with the Council: the line of the Commission is preferable to the abundance of detail in the various amendments. If these amendments were to be adopted at this stage, we ought to revisit them in the Committee on Budgetary Control, for we believe that, at this stage, matters of this kind should attract the greatest possible consensus and that the decision should not be made by a narrow majority.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, thank you for giving me the floor. I would like to share with you my astonishment. During the summer break, I wrote to Commissioner Patten to ask him how he thinks we could help the Palestinian authorities to organise or reorganise their government for the next elections. I am nothing short of astonished to have received no reply, as this was the second time I had written to him on the subject. I would like to be sure that I shall at least receive a reply on this matter by Wednesday.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as a member of the Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China I have recently been able to hold many fascinating discussions with my Chinese counterparts. I had gained the impression that a real opening up, a genuine dialogue on human rights was actually going to take place. So I too very much welcomed the release of both Ngawang Sangdrol and Jigme Sangpo. We regarded that as a sign that pledges were being honoured and promises were being kept. We very much welcomed the fact that Li Peng honoured his commitment finally to enter into contact with the Dalai Lama and that initial discussions were actually being held with representatives of the Dalai Lama. We regarded these as two very positive signs. So we are all the more dismayed now that at exactly the same time two people, Tenzin Delek and Lobsang Dhondup – a lama and one of his followers – were arrested and kept in solitary confinement for six or even eight months, although to this day it has not been established beyond doubt that they really committed the act of which they were accused. This is totally contrary to the constitutionality that we naturally expect and demand from a people or from a government. We understand very well that the fight against terrorism is important, but that means combating genuine terrorism, not dissidents. The fight against terrorism must of course also respect constitutional criteria, otherwise it cannot be justified. I only hope that this was a blunder that will be very quickly rectified by the Chinese Government, and that these two people will be released or will at least receive a fair trial. I also hope that China will make sure that the door to human rights, which has been very slightly opened, will not be slammed shut again but will be opened further, so that genuine constitutionality may also prevail in China. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I wonder if this might be an appropriate time to mention an issue that arose yesterday during voting time. It will be recalled that there was one particular vote in the plenary session on my report that was resolved by a majority of one vote. I do not want to reopen that issue. The Presidency declared that closed and I fully accept that. But following that decision a whole range of Members in this House began to indicate that machines had not worked and so on. It has occurred to me overnight that if the result of a vote is declared and there is within the Rules no provision for the issue to be reopened at all, given the alarming frequency with which a whole range of machines do not work, this could create serious difficulties. If there were a technical difficulty and a whole block of votes in one part of this House were not counted, the outcome of the votes would call into question the whole efficacy of the decisions that we make. I wonder whether in fact there should be some provision in the Rules for that. I hope that you will feel that is a genuine point of order.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am grateful to Commissioner Vitorino for his work. I speak for some Members on this side of the House in saying that there are concerns about this report. We are not one hundred percent happy. We wish we were not at this stage today, but I look at this from the point of view – which I share with several colleagues, that we do not want asylum seekers to be seen as criminals. Criminals have their fingerprints taken and we need not automatically or in any way assume that asylum seekers ought to be put into this category. Many of them are escaping from terror, from torture, from other experiences. We want to make certain that at our frontiers they are not put through similar experiences and practices again. I accept what Mr Kirkhope said a few minutes ago, that there are frictions and difficulties with the system which need to be sorted out. Other colleagues have referred to the issue of fingerprinting 14-year-olds, which has been very sensitive and very emotive. On this side of the House we are realistic. That is why we are looking for the safeguards that have been put into the report. It is why we would prefer that there be parliamentary scrutiny in the question of Commission versus Council. We believe that Parliament is there to safeguard citizens and make certain that the asylum policy is carried out in the fairest possible way. With those reservations and I know I speak on behalf of several colleagues – I will be following Mrs Terrón’s line. We wish the Commission well in this work.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would firstly like to thank Mr van Hulten. It is his first report here in plenary. This is worth a compliment although I regret, of course, that he did not expound it in his own mother tongue. It is a report which came about with difficulty and may well be too late. In my opinion, this is mainly down to the wrangling between the two major groups within our Committee on Budgetary Control. Let us be honest. The second report of the Wise Men arrived in September. We are now four months down the line. Meanwhile, Mr van Hulten has been inundated with amendments, more than 100 amendments in the first round. He went back to work, rewrote his report and took into account the very many suggestions, but had to face nearly another 100 amendments in the second round. My fear is that all of this has contributed to a report which is too detailed, too extensive and too late. Moreover, I have been informed that the Commission has approved a report – today of all days – on the reform of the Commission which will be distributed for further consultation to the various institutions and also to our Parliament, I hope. Might Mr Kinnock be able to throw some light on the matter this evening? Mr van Hulten, my Group of the and regionalists will support the attempts in tomorrow afternoon’s plenary meeting to embellish this report. After all, it makes no sense to copy the many sound recommendations made by the Committee of Wise Men word for word in your report. So tomorrow, if we vote against some amendments or against specific paragraphs, this is certainly not on account of their content but rather to render your report as a whole more readable. In any case, it should be clear that my group, of course, fully backs the recommendations made by the Committee of Wise Men. In any event, I look forward to the document which was approved by the Commission today. I also look forward to the White Paper which will be available in February. I have to inform you, Commissioner, that both the report of the Wise Men and that of Mr van Hulten will become gauges for our group, gauges which should make it clear to us whether we can have confidence in the Prodi Commission or not. I would like to end on the following point. Just as the White Paper on food safety was approved last week and released to public opinion with a clear deadline stated, we would request the same in connection with the new White Paper on the reform of the Commission. I think that there is a need for this, as public opinion is looking for change and, in any event, my group would like to see a clear change by the end of 2002.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, this is without doubt a global disaster affecting all European coastlines and Europe must pool all its resources to combat it. That is why I am dismayed by the reports that the Commissioner is suggesting Gibraltar was in some way responsible because it failed to inspect the ship. I would like to point out to the Commissioner that the Prestige has only called in at Gibraltar once in the last five years and then it did not even enter the port, it refuelled outside. In that period it has also put in at several other ports, including Algeciras, Las Palmas, Dunkirk, Cork, Rotterdam and Kalamata. We have a saying in Glasgow: if you live in a glasshouse you do not have sex with your gardener! After the Braer sank off the coast of Scotland in 1992, Neil Kinnock put forward legislation on double-hull vessels. As the Commissioner rightly pointed out, that was deferred by the Council until 2015. However, we need new legislation now to close up the loopholes.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we are delighted with the way in which the preparation for the region of Macao passing into the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China on 20 December has taken place. We hope that no doubts remain as to the climate of mutual understanding and of political will shown by Portugal and by the People’s Republic of China and that no one still feels ambiguous about the outlook for the future development of the special administrative region of Macao. We think that conditions have been created for economic and cultural relations to develop on a basis of cooperation and mutual benefit between the People’s Republic of China, specifically through Macao, and the European Union and its Member States. We agree with the joint resolution presented here despite some differences of opinion, which shows our firm desire to work together in developing these friendly relations at this historic moment, which we welcome wholeheartedly.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, conflict prevention cannot consist only of rapid reaction mechanisms and contingents of police. Conflict prevention, as Jost Lagendijk has already said, means for our Group that all EU policies should be aimed at the reduction and prevention of conflict. It means cutting agricultural export aid, opening EU markets to sensitive products, a trade policy characterised by social justice and, above all, preferential trading relationships only where respect for human rights is guaranteed. There is no doubt in our mind that the Gothenburg Resolution marks a milestone for European foreign policy, yet, despite that, what now matters is that we should not only talk about the need for conflict prevention but also do something about it. This means that a culture of prevention must be created in the European Union, and that it must permeate all its political dealings. Stopping all armaments exports and supplies of small arms to potential areas of conflict will play a crucial role. Support for human rights and sustainable development must be the core objective of European foreign policy. Conflicts can, though, only be successfully prevented if the civil actors are involved, and so we propose the establishment of a platform for NGOs and cooperation with them. This would mean financial support for non-governmental organisations, but that would be significantly cheaper than armed conflicts.

Political group: Verts-ALE
We voted against the budget guidelines proposed in this report and in the following reports, since this is a budget that is entirely geared towards satisfying financial groups, industrial and agricultural lobbies and, incidentally, is designed to fund a foreign policy that the big investors in Europe deem to be in its interests. Each Member State of the European Union is cutting the redistributed share of its expenditure in their budgets by sacrificing public services, hospitals, education, transport and by drastically limiting social expenditure so as to generate greater profits for large companies. The European Union’s budget, using subsidiarity as a pretext, is pushing this tendency even further by cutting social expenditure to a negligible level. This is one of the ways in which it is showing its refusal to work towards a levelling upwards of social protection and benefits and salaries throughout the European Union. Since the funding of both Member States and the European Union is inextricably linked, we once again express our opposition to every type of budget revenue that primarily affects the working classes, such as tax on spending, such as VAT, etc., and our opposition to all expenditure that benefits large companies and the rich, such as subsidies, grants and tax breaks.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy is particularly delighted at the fact that the compromise amendments that have been agreed upon are fully in keeping with the European Commission’s initiative to launch a Europass, an Internet system that should promote the comparability of degrees and qualifications in the EU. The compromise contains a time-based points system, with quality points being awarded to each training course. This system guarantees that in the assessment of a training course, not the length of time, but the quality, is of importance. In addition, in a compromise, the rights and duties have been tightened up of those professions that involve extra care duty to protect the consumer, by means of compulsory registration and insurance in the case of a temporary provision of services in another Member State. For women too, the same rights remain valid for access to the labour market. A discriminating provision providing for the possibility of retaining a qualification only if work had not been interrupted for two out of the last five years, has been deleted. The directive is of vital importance in enhancing mobility on the labour market and is an essential precondition for achieving the Lisbon objective. A transparent system of qualifications will become more important, particularly in the light of enlargement, which will result in a further increase in intra-Community migration.

Political group: ELDR
Despite the fact that I am convinced of the need for a Community patent, I voted against Mrs Palacio Vallelersundi’s report and the final resolution on the Community patent as I believe the conditions governing its implementation are unacceptable. Since the fundamental aspects of this regulation relate to the linguistic arrangements, legal certainty and the role of the national offices do not meet the expectations of users. In these conditions, the Community patent would not be profitable and there is a risk that those within the profession would not use it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I have before me the development plan for 2000-2006 sent to you by the Ministry of the National Economy last autumn. On page 1-119 it says that if the 2nd Community Support Framework had been completed between 1994 and 1999 in accordance with the relevant plan, this would have increased the average annual rate of growth in the Gross National Product for the 1994-1999 period by 0.6%. This would have meant additional GNP in the order of GRD 1.6 trillion over and above what we actually had. The government accepts this and, between the lines, I think that you accept that there are problems with the public administration in Greece. More importantly, I think that you will have problems with the management committees and I should like you to tell me specifically what you intend to do with the Management Organisation Unit and relations with the Ministry of the National Economy, which could be better? What is to be done about outsourcing the external employees whom we need? Will there be incentives and penalties from now on in order to ensure that the Community Support Framework is applied correctly to those who need it? More importantly, what is to be done about the gaping wound in the Social Fund in Greece which, in my view, is no more than a black hole which just swallows up Community funds?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is obvious to everybody; we must discuss not only the events in Iraq, but also the lessons that the EU can learn from them. One year after the war, I feel that the time is right for us to investigate why these differences occurred and why the EU now needs a common position. I feel it would be wrong to postpone such a debate until some future date. You, Mr President, have yourself just reminded us of the large number of reports planned for the coming sessions. Our group has, consequently, called for a debate on Iraq to be held during this session. (Parliament rejected the request) Thursday President. As regards the Commission statement on the effect on the marine environment of low frequency active sonar, I have received a request from the Group for motions for resolutions to be tabled to wind up the debate.

Political group: Verts-ALE