GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, today, we want to strengthen the new, not only economic, but political and social, identity of Europe. I think that in order to do this we need to find a new internal structure that is suited to the reality of our diversity. Our present reality is not, however, simply shaped by the Member States alone, but there is a greater diversity and richness, represented culturally and socially by the historic peoples and nations of Europe and, politically, by the federated States, constitutional regions and autonomous communities, in particular, and also, of course, on another level, by the purely administrative regions, the provinces and the local authorities. Do you not think, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, that, by virtue of the mandate laid down in the Treaty of Nice, that in the Laeken Declaration, this question of European diversity, of the different cultural, social and political realities, should be specifically included as an important part of the debate to take place during the years 2002 and 2003 on the future of the Union and the division of competences between the institutions, in order to seek and find the best possible structure, which will allow us to share, without tension or conflict, the various, necessary levels of competence and sovereignty in existence in Europe?

Political group: Verts-ALE
I am sure that the President-in-Office has noticed that five of the first 16 questions on the order paper, the previous question from Mrs Frassoni, and so on, are all about transparency. Since we represent the public – the people of Europe – I hope that the Council notes that there is a wish for transparency in the Council. My question is this: is it correct that the decision within the Council on which documents are to be released to the public and which are kept secret is made by a committee of the 15 press officers from the national representation offices by a majority vote? I was told this by one of the 15 press officers. They sit there, completely unelected, and decide what is going to be published and what is not. Is that really true because it is very hard to believe?

Political group: PPE-DE
This report is very timely, given the need to put Article 299(2) of the Treaty on European Union objectively and swiftly into practice, and I essentially support its positions on the sustainable development of the outermost regions. The special characteristics of these regions derive in general from their island status and their distance from continental Europe, but also from their chronic dependence on only a few products or even a single product, and thus require specific measures designed to overcome these constraints. I am therefore delighted that the report has adopted positions which to a great extent include the proposals I submitted to the Parliamentary Committee. I must also stress, however, that insufficient attention is given in the report to certain particular social situations that exist in these regions or in some of them, which would also require special measures. This could be rectified through the approval of a draft amendment that we tabled for this purpose in due time. - Bowis report (A5-0272/2000)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, as Manolo Medina said, once again we are talking about Colombia. In this case, in order to ask for protection for the Irish Franciscan priest Brendan Forde and his colleagues. However, the last time a human rights defender was assassinated in Colombia was in May. His name was Ramiro Zapata. 25 human rights defenders have been assassinated in the past year and a half. In recent years, 3 000 activists from Unión Patriótica have died. Luis Guillermo Pérez, also a human rights defender, insists that there is a plan, called the Hundred plan, to assassinate up to one hundred human rights defenders. I think that this is a catastrophe for Colombia. Let us hope that this human rights defender is exaggerating. But if what he says is true, it is a catastrophe for Colombia. I think that the European Union should have its own initiative, its own strategy, separate from any military venture, as that of the United States appears to be, in order to make life more bearable for the people of Colombia.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, our Group wishes to thank the rapporteurs, Messrs Dimitrakopoulos and Leinen, for the important work which they have carried out. I must also tell them that, within my group, there are differing views, according to differing national experiences. I will say the same thing here that I have said in my group: the debate is not whether we say yes or no to federalism. The debate is how to go about European construction at the point of enlargement. It is making sure that we do not just build a Europe of the States and a Europe of the people, but, especially, a Europe of the citizens. We must create a fully democratic institutional fabric. We know that there are democratic deficits and that they are considerable. At the moment the challenge in the face of enlargement is to achieve, as the rapporteurs have said, greater efficiency and greater democracy. The Intergovernmental Conference cannot end with the same disappointment that we had in Amsterdam. We cannot create an Amsterdam 2. We have to create a Treaty which gives rise to genuine European construction in which more than 400 million Europeans can share economic prosperity, a social dimension and a democratic life. This is the great challenge for the European institutions and for European politics. My vision of European construction is compatible with the fundamental lines which are laid out in the report which we are discussing today. It is, of course, necessary to give the Commission the powers it needs and make it responsible to Parliament. This is precisely the issue. We must clearly define the different democratic powers in the field of European competences and we must know who is making decisions and to whom they are responsible. Mr President, Parliament does not take a corporate position. Our minimum demand is that Parliament be treated as an adult which has to request that the Commission take certain responsibilities, but which also has to participate actively in European construction on behalf of the European citizens. On behalf of the European citizens, we have to ask today not only for that fine-tuning of decision making but also for the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into the Treaty. The Charter of Fundamental Rights must give citizens the capacity to demand compliance with these rights in the European courts. This is the position which we can adopt in our Group, asking for more efficiency and more democracy.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, climate change is one of the most important environmental issues but also one of the most difficult ones to solve. It impacts greatly upon economic processes. The breakdown of the WTO round in Seattle has taught us that the EU should be convincing in its endeavours to achieve global environmental policy. We need to set a good example ourselves. So far, Europe has made fancy declarations but greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union will be in excess of 8 percent instead of under 8 percent if no additional measures are taken. This is mainly due to the fact that the transport sector has got out of hand: more cars, more trucks and more aircraft clocking up more miles. This is why I urge the European Commission, in the next plan of action for combating climate change, to address the most difficult issue, namely traffic. For example, zero emissions for traffic and a ten percent reduction for households, industry and energy production itself. EU measures to restrict CO2 emissions by trucks are necessary, as is the promotion of economical cars, such as hybrid and electrical cars, or at last a European energy/CO2 tax imposed by those 12 or 13 countries which want to impose a hefty levy. Only if the European Union manages to reduce greenhouse gases can we be credible. Then we will be able to reach a breakthrough at the sixth conference of the Groups in The Hague. The most difficult tangles in the trade in emission rights and clean development mechanisms can then be cut through. Needless to say, for the Green group, nuclear energy does not even enter into the picture as far as reaching a solution is concerned. In Europe, but also worldwide, we need to focus on renewable energy, such as wind energy, solar energy and biomass. In the case of a windmill, the cost of making and erecting one is covered after only four to six months. Compare this with nuclear energy where it takes as much as ten years before nett energy finally exceeds the cost of building a plant.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, your silence in the face of the untimely speech by Mr van Velzen obliges me to speak, not only because Mr Imbeni is a colleague from my own group, but also because he is a Vice-President of Parliament and a person who has always acted with great dignity, as an MEP and as Vice-President, in defence of our common values. Furthermore, I am sure that Mr Imbeni, who is not present at the moment, being in Cuba or Timbuktu, will always defend the resolutions of the European Parliament and will behave with the greatest dignity. I ask Mr van Velzen to withdraw his comments and, if he wishes to repeat them, to do so in the presence of Mr Imbeni. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
The European Parliament has today expressed its opinion of the proposed directive on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles. It is indeed essential to improve the level of safety and to mitigate the environmental impact of these vehicles, the volume of which is constantly increasing. Setting up random mandatory roadside inspections in order to check their state of repair throughout the year is a pertinent idea, provided that it can be implemented effectively. This proposed directive would be an extremely useful complement to the efforts undertaken in towns and cities, especially in the form of urban transport plans, particularly in the conurbation around Rouen, which is crossed by 5 000 commercial vehicles daily. It is also important, as a matter of urgency, to consider having recourse to alternative means of transport for goods (waterways, railways, etc.) and to consider developing clean vehicles. These are the reasons why, ladies and gentlemen, I supported the proposed directive on the technical roadside inspection of commercial vehicles today. (The sitting was suspended at 12.35 p.m. and resumed at 3 p.m.) IN THE CHAIR: MRS FONTAINEPresident

Political group: PSE
Mr President, rapporteur, this drug programme primarily concerns people who are drug addicts and their families. They desperately need help. I therefore feel that it is very important to undertake an honest analysis of the results of the programme and to draw the necessary conclusions. The aims of this drug control programme are first and foremost to reduce the supply and demand. Neither of these aims has been achieved. Irrespective of the age group, country and drug concerned, drug taking is increasing or stagnating despite the harsh penalties and much greater number of prosecutions at national and increasingly at European level. The same applies to the reduction in the supply of drugs. For a long time only 10% of the drug trade has been caught by the police. These shattering results are hushed up. Instead, the drug programme before us just contains a copy of the previous programme with cosmetic changes. Fortunately the Commission is undertaking an evaluation. However, an external assessment would clearly be better on this sensitive subject. In any case, the appropriate action will have to be taken. Despite the lack of success of the programme, a large part of the financial resources in the context of the drug programme goes into combating drugs. For anything that is aimed at minimising the damage, there is a very small amount left over. The question remains, however, why this programme is not clearly aiming to achieve the hidden goals. We cannot escape the conclusion that the very fact of this programme’s existence is all that matters, and that in fact it serves different aims to those that have been stated. What does this mean? The drug programme is used to increase the legitimacy of the EU. Drug programmes therefore have a purely instrumental character. And because that is at the expense of the addicts, we urgently need to think again. There is no ideal solution in drug policy, we all agree on that. But action must be taken. The urgent aim must be to minimise the damage and that must be firmly established in the drug programme. What that means in practice I shall show in four demands with which I shall now conclude. Firstly, supply should be reduced to the minimum. Secondly, methadone programmes should be expanded in the EU and the tried and tested controlled practice of the handing in of heroin should be introduced. Thirdly, drugs users should be able to test drugs for their content and mixture. Only in this way can further damage be prevented; we therefore need EU-wide drug checking. Fourthly, city cooperation should be promoted, taken from the idea of the European Cities Drug Policy as a prime example of a project that recognises – legal and illegal – drugs as belonging to society and lends support to people dealing responsibly with these drugs. We urgently need such a drug programme.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, allow me to address Mr Simpson. I understand that Mr Simpson has been to Sweden and to Norrland, which is one of the ‘worst’, but most splendid, sparsely-populated areas in the whole of Europe. You do not appear to have learnt anything, and you do not appear to have listened to the arguments that were put to you. I have many reports which you may read and in which you will find reasons why liberalisation is so important and such a good idea. The Royal Mail competes with other companies and delivers letters to me in Malmö in Sweden. This, in my opinion Mr Simpson, is a good thing. In this way I get a better and cheaper service. The Commission's proposal is a good one, but it is not sufficiently liberal. The text of the report takes the wrong line. The postal service monopoly must be abolished. The interests of consumers are best served in a market with free competition. We know this. This, of course, also applies to the postal market. Why should other conditions prevail in this market? The rapid technical development and the requirements placed on postal companies to adapt their activities quickly make an end-date for the abolition of the monopoly necessary – as early a date as possible. I personally think that 2007 is much too late. Madam President, the Swedish postal service was completely liberalised as early as 1993. At that time, I was a member of the Swedish Parliament and was involved in taking that decision. The Swedish Post still has 95 per cent of the market share in Sweden. In order for private postal deliverers to have a reasonable chance of establishing themselves in the market, it is therefore necessary for them to capture a large share of the market, i.e. for the market to be competitive. We in this House must give the postal market a chance. These are new times, Mr Simpson. I would like to say: “Learn from Mr Blair.” In conclusion, I would like to say that the postal service in Sweden has not deteriorated, in some respects it has even improved. The costs are not higher than in other countries. If we do not do something about the postal service now, it will be even worse in a few years. Consumers will lose out, employees will lose out, Europe will lose competitive strength and growth. Good luck, Mr Bolkestein!

Political group: ELDR
Enlargement of the EU is a reunification of the Europe which was divided for a long time. The EU’s Member States have an historic task which consists in welcoming the countries of Eastern and Central Europe into European cooperation. Enlargement ought not, however, to be regarded as a problem, but must be seen as an opportunity for deepening cooperation on cross-border issues which the States cannot solve on their own. The governments of the EU countries, like the European Parliament, have a significant responsibility for ensuring that the necessary reforms are carried out without delay so that enlargement becomes a reality. Preparations for enlargement are going slowly. Europe’s leaders must therefore begin to show the political will to accept the challenge posed by enlargement. Clear dates ought to be established for when the negotiations should be completed. Stopping the enlargement process now would be like turning the clock back ten years. That would be fatal for European integration. One of the most important reforms which must be implemented is a thorough reorganisation of the common agricultural policy. The current system of subsidies, grants and quotas must be replaced by free trade and adaptation to the market. Reform of agricultural policy is necessary not only for economic reasons, but also so that European agriculture might be characterised by efficiency and good quality. An extended EU must not create A and B teams in Europe. If Europe is to become whole, the objective must be for all Member States to participate in all areas of cooperation. Obviously, freedom of movement must also apply to the countries of Eastern and Central Europe from their first day of membership.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, we must all start from a basic, binding assumption. It is intolerable that raw materials or compound feedingstuffs should be dangerous for animals or human beings. Man's food must be safe to eat. At this time, in addition to the developments and progress in our legislation, we must send the citizens a loud, unambiguous message. We must reassure the public that the Europe of rights does genuinely protect the rights enshrined in its Treaties and in the Fundamental Charter of European Rights. I am sure, Commissioner, that Parliament will lend you all the support necessary for the new initiatives. We need clear measures. I feel that, until it is proved otherwise, a total ban on meat-and-bone meal has become necessary, just as the introduction of general testing and the harmonisation and effective implementation of Community legislation in all the Member States is necessary, and just as it is necessary not just to monitor the application of new labelling rules but to bring forward the introduction of these rules to the earliest possible juncture. I will end by affirming this principle: the cost of these measures will certainly be very high, but our priority is health. Secondly, without these guarantees, the fall in consumption will impact negatively upon the entire industry. Therefore, consumers and producers must unite to obtain greater guarantees of the inviolable principle that food should be healthy.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, here we are on the eve of another European Summit which will see many of us out on the streets of Nice together with millions of citizens. Like them, we will be unable to influence the outcome of the negotiations. Mr Prodi, I am extremely concerned at what might be the outcome of the final night of the negotiations, that night when the victors are usually those with the greatest resistance to tiredness and boredom, that night which everyone sees as the last chance to resolve the points which are still without solutions. This is the most negative, most undemocratic part of the intergovernmental method: the whims of the human element, the results of last-minute bargaining and the obligation to achieve a result at all costs. I am extremely afraid that we will end up with some rather strange measures such as a Senate of national Members of Parliament, a Mr Euro or a Mr WTO, further diminishing of Parliament's powers or further marginalisation of Parliament, or some other protocol such as that proposed on the WTO which, if it were adopted, would reduce the Commission to a puppy dog on multiple leashes held by many different owners, each one pulling in a different direction. Those who are in Nice, out on the streets and in the dozens of forums and meetings scheduled will, in my opinion, at least be able to push for one result, namely that this will be the last IGC, that the hazy reflection on the future of Europe Mr Védrine spoke of will translate into the launch at Nice of a process which will establish the time frames and methods for drawing up and adopting a democratic European Constitution. One last word on the subject of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, and the bold words we have heard this morning. Be careful lest we repeat the painful fiasco of the last enlargement when, after months of threats, the European Parliament gave in to the governments. I hope that this will not be the case this time as well.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, Commissioner, rapporteurs, thank you for the work you have done. I should mainly like to focus on the development of rail transport rather than safety, interoperability and suchlike. In the first instance, these seem to me to be excellent reports. The importance of this development of the railways to the environment and to safety is of course abundantly clear. The first rail package was aimed at opening up freight transport, particularly internationally, and set a specific date. We fought hard for that, and we actually agreed at the time that we would keep our hands off passenger rail transport until there was a separate document about it. In my opinion, Parliament is going two steps too far: firstly, in going ahead and talking about liberalisation of countries at internal level, and, secondly, as regards the liberalisation of passenger transport, in particular. If this is a lever for negotiations, I can understand it. In my view, however, we should drop it immediately and wait until the Commission makes a proposal following a detailed evaluation of the situation in a number of countries, particularly in the UK (privatisation), the Netherlands and several other countries. These are experiencing great problems as a result of splitting up companies. It already starts with deregulation; it already starts with the division of companies. As an industrial engineer, with knowledge of the way companies should be organised, I say that it is necessary to keep a firm hold on the maintenance of materials and other things, for example. We should go back to that. We should have an evaluation first, and then a debate on how to proceed with this kind of liberalisation. I wholeheartedly support the position of the Council in this connection.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the agenda for this afternoon includes Mr Pex’s report on sanctions for pollution offences at sea. Mr Pex is well, as are Mr Doorn and others, and I am telling you that so that you are not dismayed by what I also have to tell you, which is that they have been in an aircraft accident. It would appear from what I have been told that the aircraft ran off the runway, but all of them are all right. Mr Pex has asked that his report should be taken today rather than being adjourned, and that it should be presented by Mr Bremmer, who, although he is not a member of the committee, is well-informed about the issue. I was more than willing to convey this request to you.

Political group: PPE-DE