GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I have voted against this resolution because it lacks balance. Firstly, Parliament has supported the inclusion on the Cancun agenda of the so-called Singapore issues, in other words, issues relating to investment, competition, trade facilitation and public procurement. This goes against the interests of the poor countries. Secondly, Parliament has missed an opportunity to take a stand against the complaint relating to GMOs that the United States has lodged against the EU and to reject the slanderous propaganda that has accompanied this complaint and which fools no one. We only have to recall the unacceptable stance the United States has adopted on the issue of accessibility to medicines. Thirdly, the idea that the world’s public assets, such as water, must be considered to be the common heritage of humanity has not been accepted. Lastly, Parliament has not upheld the principle of the hierarchy of laws between WTO law and international environmental and social law, or the principle of the primacy of the United Nations. Of course we wish to promote a more multilateral approach, but the context of the Cancun meeting is still a source of great concern. I can only hope that my reservations are unfounded and that unlike at Doha, we will achieve our aim without having to wait for another round of negotiations. - Report Blokland (A5-0237/2003)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I too am delighted that the Irish Presidency is prioritising the objective of reuniting the peoples of Europe, after divergences on key points of the Convention’s proposal led to its collapse in Brussels. The June elections must not be allowed to widen the split in the Union, but must instead give a new democratic boost to pro-European feeling. Parliament wants to get back on course towards a constitution straight away, and appreciates the commitment to reconvene the Intergovernmental Conference and to act transparently, for the sake of closer and closer relations between the Union’s institutions and its citizens. We also share the multilateral position for a common foreign and defence policy, for a solid partnership with the United States, for the reaffirmation of the United Nations and for the resumption of international trade talks. Public opinion is, however, concerned about the future. The spring Council will report the successes that have been achieved, but there is also the risk that the social model will be weakened without Europe’s economy becoming any more competitive in the world. We have to think carefully about the choices we need to make to relaunch the Lisbon strategy and also about the Union’s financial perspective: that is, the resources that Europe can call on to face the challenges that were clearly spelt out by Mr Prodi. These challenges concern, first of all, the enlargement of the Union and also, especially in the long-term, the future of our continent’s younger generations.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr Jarzembowski has undertaken a very difficult task, but he has carried out a major, carefully considered piece of work affecting crucial areas. Ports are clearly a very important factor when we discuss fulfilment of the Kyoto commitments in as much as they can ease the pressure on land transport and make things easier in a wide range of other areas. It is therefore essential from an environmental point of view to have some of the goods at present conveyed by land transported instead by sea. If this is to happen successfully, ports must be efficient, and we must therefore see liberalisation within those areas proposed by the Commission: loading and unloading, passenger services and whatever else has been mentioned, presumably with some exemptions in special regions. Perhaps outlying districts, in particular, can ask to be accorded special consideration. However, that too has, of course, been mentioned in the report. I hope that, in the light of the many views presented in this House, we shall now be able to agree upon a proposal so that together we are able to support the Commission’s overall goal for the benefit of the whole of the EU.

Political group: PPE-DE
Parliament’s vote on the Council regulation on the Community patent draws a definitive line under 18 months of work necessary in order for Parliament to adopt a position which a broad majority of Members supported today. Along with the majority of Members, I felt that the proposed regulation aimed to ensure we combined three elements: efficiency, lowest economic cost and linguistic diversity. The latter cannot be extended ad infinitum and it is good that Parliament realises this. We will, in future, be forced to make other, even more painful decisions.

Political group: PSE
I would thank the President-in-Office of the Council for that detailed answer. I believe that these major export subsidies are basically divisive and destroy the agricultural market in large parts of the Third World. It will only be possible to achieve a fair trade policy once the subsidies have been abolished. I have two follow-up questions. The first concerns the extensive fraud involving export subsidies, as pointed out by, for example, the Court of Auditors. What measures are being taken to get to grips with this fraud? My second question concerns whether, on the basis of the Presidency’s report, I can assume that, once the Commission has presented its proposal, the Spanish Presidency will support substantial reductions in export subsidies.

Political group: GUE-NGL
In Lisbon and Stockholm, it was decided that Europe should become the world’s most dynamic and competitive knowledge-driven economy. Of the seventeen million companies in Europe, no fewer than 99 percent form part of the medium-sized and small business sector. That accounts for more than 70 percent of employment, 50 percent of investment and 60 percent of the Union’s wealth. As such, the medium-sized and small businesses are the most important economic factor in the European economy. The competitiveness of these businesses very much relies on their innovative capacity. At the moment, Parliament is working hard on the Sixth Framework Programme, in which the participation of SMEs must be guaranteed at the same – or, ideally, a higher – level. I have therefore proposed to increase the budget available to SMEs to 15 percent from the current 10 percent. But that participation of SMEs must, in the view of the , take place within themed programmes. Indeed, in that way, it is guaranteed that large and small companies will join forces, for small companies do not have the expertise and manpower to go it alone. It is not acceptable for most of the limited research budget that is available to be spent on the flanking policy in the Member States, for that is not a European task. It is more important to simplify the participation of medium-sized and small businesses in the Sixth Framework Programme. That is why the ‘rules of participation’ must be simplified and standardised so that research applications submitted by all Directorates-General for the Sixth Framework Programme as a whole can be dealt with more efficiently and more quickly. I should like to conclude by giving you some food for thought: Europe is good at converting euros into research, but often fails in converting research into euros, and that must change in future.

Political group: ELDR
The report concerns the socio-political agenda for the next five years. It contains a series of proposals we wholeheartedly support for improving social conditions and workers’ conditions. We appreciate the rapporteur’s words on the open coordination method which respects the Member States’ independence on socio-political issues and is founded upon voluntary harmonisation and coordination. We are, nonetheless, concerned that the report at the same time contains proposals to the effect that the Commission must be the engine for developing social policy in Europe, meaning growing supranationalism in this area too. If the legislation concerning labour market and social policy is to operate well, it must be the end result of a process of change that develops from below and reflects the variety of conditions and experiences in Europe.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Secretary-General, Liberal Democrats and Reformers in this House echo your words on immigration. We recognise the value that immigrants bring to Europe and we understand that closing Europe's front door will only drive the desperate to seek access through the back. Many of us were migrants once upon a time and we know how ill it behoves our generation to shut the gates of mercy on mankind. A Europe of security and justice for all is a Europe that extends those rights to those who justly seek a new life here. Like you, we recognise the political challenge that implies. Your words today remind us of the power of the United Nations to transcend the parochial in us all. The United Nations has a precious power to speak for us all. That is why my Group wishes to see the return of the United Nations to Iraq as soon as the security situation allows. Credible and legitimate democratic government in Iraq is not possible without the presence of the United Nations. (Applause) We want a political settlement in Iraq that guarantees the highest standards of civil and political rights for all Iraqis. The United Nations was founded by the same generation who founded this European Union – ‘to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind’. Like this Union it believes that the closer we sit at the table of peace and prosperity, the slower we will be to reach for the tools of war. It is a sorry testament to a stubborn world that the UN still seems such an unlikely experiment in international governance. Winston Churchill once said that the UN is designed not to take us to heaven, but to save us from hell. In order to do that better the UN must reform. As its largest contributors, the EU and its Member States have not only the weight to insist on reform but the responsibility to do so. A mature Europe would find the political will to put behind it an institutional settlement at the UN that leaves power where it lay in 1945. A mature Europe would insist on a permanent membership that reflected the realities of the 21st century. It would accept that the current veto is a tool of obstruction, a privilege that can no longer be justified. Finally, Secretary-General, on behalf of the allow me to pay tribute to the members of your organisation who will not see you take this prize in their name today. Your staff who lost their lives with Sergio Vieira de Mello – including Fiona who was known to me – died defending a vision of national renewal in Iraq that is now our duty. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, this is the third time I have been in the unfortunate position of reporting that an indirect threat has been made against me inside Parliament; this time in the form of various messages, mainly on the subject of Cyprus. Yesterday I found a piece of paper outside my office on which someone had drawn a map of Cyprus and written the words 'Cyprus is Turkish'. I had already complained here, in plenary, the first time something like this happened. Parliament's security services investigated, my associates and I were examined and we gave whatever information we had at our disposal, but the incident has been repeated a third time now. Yesterday, the security guard who came took these diagrams, which I consider threatening to me – I would point out that I am the vice-chairman of the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee and perhaps that is the connection – and I wonder: are we safe inside this Parliament or can anyone come in and make any threats they want and, more to the point, without having any connection with the Member States of the European Union?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I welcomed Commissioner Patten's speech, in particular his words about his own personal experience, and the absurdity of a punishment which is becoming increasingly less effective in the world as a deterrent in the minds of a growing number of citizens. Europe has certainly made substantial progress in its undertaking, with the formalisation of the rejection of the death penalty and the affirmation of the right to life in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the forceful stipulation that any country wishing to join the European enlargement process must abolish the death penalty, the increase in intervention measures in respect of relations with third countries under the human rights clause and, lastly, the Council's prioritisation of the moratorium on the use of the death penalty as a common foreign and security policy action. When our international institutions, when the AJA Tribunal is faced with the sentence inflicted on the criminal Tadic – who is guilty of heinous crimes – and we compare these appalling crimes with any of the incidents in any countries, including democratic countries, as a result of which thousands of people are now waiting on death row, we may be able to appreciate the fact that what had been a purely European characteristic, that is the rejection of capital punishment, may – in political time, not historical time – spread until it becomes the clearly predominant political, institutional and humanitarian modus operandi throughout the world. This is the inspiration behind the new Europe of the start of the third millennium. This, Mr President, is why it is necessary for the Commission – and I would ask Commissioner Patten to give an incisive response – to make good use of these amendments to the European Union's budget that were tabled by our Group of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party in respect of the 2000 budget. Indeed, there can be no institutional initiative in this field without close cooperation with non-governmental organisations. I therefore propose, Commissioner, that you consider the possibility of Europe establishing a European Day of protest against the death penalty: this would make a substantial contribution to generating a universal consciousness from that cradle of civilisation which Europe is and wishes to remain. (Applause) IN THE CHAIR: MR PROVANVice-President

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I am speaking on behalf of the Group of the , but I feel I must also express some opinions and concerns as Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. The committee of which I am Chairman, and Parliament in general, were strongly in favour of the Convention and advocated the drawing up of a European Constitution. Work has begun on the Constitution. The Convention has succeeded in fulfilling its task, and this gives us great satisfaction. When we are called upon shortly to express our opinion on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference, as the current Treaty lays down, we will assess the draft adopted by the Convention as well. We will be in an even better position to do so when we have seen the text – which needs further improvement, as Mr Brok and other Members have said – of Parts III and IV of the draft. As well as this deep satisfaction, we would like to express our appreciation of, and gratitude to, our representatives for their endeavours in the Convention and, in particular, in the Praesidium, to uphold the positions of the European Parliament. Of course, the draft adopted by consensus represents common ground between different positions: some of our representatives’ proposals met with substantial resistance, echoes of which were heard in this Chamber just now. Our opinion must, therefore, be neither triumphalistic nor dogmatic, and it must not fail to express our concern, particularly on two points. Firstly, the risk of a change in the institutional balance of powers due to the creation of a new position at the top of the Union, the position of full-time President of the European Council. The Committee on Constitutional Affairs declared itself to be fully against this, proposing alternative or compromise solutions, but they were not accepted. Secondly, the possibility that the unanimity obligation would obstruct the decision-making process in key fields in a 25-Member State Union. We hope that the Intergovernmental Conference will be able to go further: on this and other matters, we are determined to prevent regression in respect of the Convention’s conclusions. We must, however, look closely at the unknowns which will affect the future of the Union. Maintaining a critical attitude and ongoing vigilance does not mean being destructive or pessimistic but serves to give fresh impetus to the process of integration and European unity. Altiero Spinello taught us that: without his criticism of the Single Act, the progress made at Maastricht and Amsterdam would not have been achieved. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
The issue addressed in this report is difficult due to its history and its far-reaching ramifications. As far as we are concerned, we are vehemently opposed to pirating and counterfeiting, and we advocate rules to promote the use of discoveries and inventions that belong to all humankind in these free and fair times. The first consideration is, therefore, the object of the protection of intellectual property. Should authors’ rights, trademarks and patents be treated in the same way? While we steadfastly oppose the misappropriation and commercialisation of human knowledge and of what is part of human heritage, we acknowledge the difficulty of striking a balance between legitimate property rights and the social and collective benefits of the item concerned. This, however, is the theory. Whereas mechanisms to protect these rights are unable to stop trade and abuse, they must not be so lax as to allow, or even encourage, pirating and counterfeiting. An example of this is Port wine, and other such designations of origin to be preserved or created, given that it represents heritage that is universal and, therefore, local and national. As such, in the name of spurious liberalisation, it can have a devastating economic, social and cultural impact, as well as a detrimental effect on health. The rapporteur has shown caution and, on this issue, it is better to be safe than sorry. Nonetheless, the rejection of certain amendments, especially those relating to the ‘federalist’ tendency, in which caution was nowhere to be seen, led us to vote against.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, first we should congratulate the Commissioner and ECHO for the aid provided. Criticisms of EU aid are frequently unfair, and all the reports from Iran suggest that the EUR 2.3 million deployed by the European Union within 72 hours using the primary emergency decision were both well received and well targeted. Despite the gravity of the losses, a thousand lives were saved by more than a thousand international search and rescue teams, and this Parliament should join with the head of the UN team in Bam who has described it as the best disaster response he has seen in 20 years. When we talk about south-south assistance we should at the same time congratulate the Iranian Red Crescent for mobilising more than 8 000 relief workers, and, despite what Robert Kilroy-Silk may say in the UK, Arab countries, who have offered 400 million for the reconstruction of Bam. It is not surprising that a humanitarian disaster at Christmas time provoked such a huge public response amongst the peoples of Europe, but it is right in this debate that we draw attention to the neglected emergencies which have not commanded the same media or public attention – in Angola, for example, where the UN appeal has raised only half of the 300 million sought, or Mozambique, where the figure is 12% of just 1.6 million needed, or Zambia, where only 10% of the required amount has been raised. Commissioner, at the very least we need your assurance today that no money to benefit Iran is diverted from these countries, where human lives are just as much at risk. Finally, it is right to include in our resolution a message to the Iranians that our international solidarity must be matched by their commitment to international human rights and standards of democracy. The procedure agreed by the Iranian Guardian Council for the screening of election candidates does not meet those standards. Of course, we in Europe do not seek to attach conditions to our help, but we do join with the many Iranians whose lives have been saved in wanting and expecting free and fair elections for their country.

Political group: PSE
The EPLP has voted for the motion for a resolution on the Stockholm European Council. However, we have reservations about paragraph 13. The EPLP continues to have reservations, as was expressed at first reading of the framework directive on informing and consulting employees. The EPLP supports the view of the UK Minister for Trade and Industry, Stephen Byers, that it may be inappropriate to have European-wide legislation in the area of information and consultation. Mr Byers stated that for the UK, 'our whole system of corporate structures is quite different from that on the continent. However, in many respects, the directive reflects the continental system of corporate governance, not that in the United Kingdom. The directive is not appropriate for several reasons, but the issue is important and we should deal with it in our domestic setting.' (Commons Hansard Debates 18 January 2001)

Political group: PSE
Karin Junker's own-initiative report seeks to tackle one of the world's most difficult challenges, of achieving more of the stated outcomes of the UN International Conference on Population and Development, held in 1994. The report starkly highlights some of the statistics which clearly demonstrate that more action is required. Globally, one woman dies each minute from pregnancy-related causes, about 200 000 maternal deaths per year result from the lack or the failure of contraceptive services, at least 75 million of the 175 million pregnancies each year are unwanted, and rape and other forms of sexual violence are increasing, including in Europe. These, and a whole host of other facts contained in the report, clearly point to a need for increased action and assistance to be given by developed countries to combating poverty and encouraging economic growth, with a corresponding increase in educational opportunities, particularly lacking in some countries, for women and girls. On the basis of the latest figures, the indicators for the Cairo conference objectives are still showing shocking inequalities between the world's wealthy and poor countries and regions. The EU governments can and should take a lead in improving the situation.

Political group: Verts-ALE