GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I welcome today’s debate and the European Commission’s long-awaited communication on human rights. I particularly welcome the commitment to give real substance to the human rights clauses in our trade and partnership agreements with third countries – something we badly failed to do with Mexico. I also welcome a number of the specific country statements in the draft resolution, including our strong call for the dismantling of paramilitary groups in Columbia. I share our strong statement of support and solidarity for human rights organisations and defenders, who risk their lives daily in conflict situations around the world to defend principles, which we hold dear. I have three specific points I want to raise in the context of the debate. Firstly, whilst I welcome the commitment in the communication to appeal to European enterprises to do more to respect human rights, reflected in paragraphs 55 and 92 of our resolution, I have to say to the Commission that I am disappointed that the Relex DGs appear to have opted out of the draft Green Paper on Corporate Social Responsibility. I ask them to revisit that before it is too late. Words should be followed by action. Secondly, I welcome, and I call for wider attention to, paragraph 108, concerning human rights abuses against disabled people. The organisation Disability Awareness in Action has recorded over 2,000 such abuses within Europe and they should be dealt with by human rights monitoring organisations and by the Commission. Finally, I welcome paragraph 16 which calls for a review of the way we deal with human rights issues in Parliament.

Political group: PSE
The parties that I represent in this House, Eusko Alkartasuna and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya, fully support the Roure report on improving judicial cooperation in criminal matters, particularly in the area of combating organised crime, the laundering of the proceeds from crime and financial crime. We also support the future establishment of a convention to help combat organised crime and money laundering, and the various measures proposed in order to achieve those purposes. The idea of creating an area of freedom, security and justice in Europe is, obviously, an aspiration that we share. We feel that the strict limitation of the reasons for which the Member States may refuse to provide judicial cooperation solely to “essential interests,” thus excluding the notions of sovereignty, public order and national security in force up until now is a step forward, but is still inadequate. This is mainly because we still find it unacceptable for a State to be able to invoke a “general interest” in order to be able to deny judicial cooperation in criminal matters. This shows, once again, that the Member States have a long way to go in understanding the meaning of shared sovereignty. Moreover, I should point out, as a Member representing Basques and Catalans, that there continues to be an emphasis on cooperation between States, without taking into account that in the EU other police forces operate that are not State bodies. This report and, in general, the area of freedom, safety and justice in Europe, is based on democracy and on the rule of law that should reign in the EU. Therefore, what most concerns me about the future of legal cooperation in the EU is that currently some States are proposing criminal reforms that are bordering on the violation of human rights. As you will be aware, the Spanish government has initiated a reform of criminal law to make sentences tougher for certain types of crimes. Specifically, this special legislation is considering sentences of up to ten years in prison for children of 14 years of age, not to mention other measures. Ladies and gentlemen, we are convinced that Europe needs to construct the area of freedom, security and justice that we so often cite in our speeches. We will be the first to support it. However, I would like to draw your attention to the possible reforms of criminal law that could take place in various Member States such as Spain, for example, with the Partido Popular in power – which is taking advantage of a certain situation – because these reforms are still a concern for the Europe of freedom and democracy.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, so despite the proven risks, despite the hostility of the communities of the valleys, it has been decided to reopen the Mont Blanc tunnel to heavy goods vehicles, deliberately sacrificing the alternative of rail transport. The Maurienne valley, the Fréjus tunnel, the valleys of Briançon, the Mont Genèvre pass and the Chamonix valley deserve a better fate than being merely HGV fodder', as the Savoy League put it. Alas, it seems that the road transport lobbies come before the health of the inhabitants, the safety of travellers or respect for sites of outstanding beauty. What have the countries concerned done since March 1999 to replace road with rail? Not a thing. Between the first half of 2000 and the first half of 2001, rail freight between Italy and France fell by 8% and combined transport by 10%. In face of such lack of foresight, I can only support the request from the Savoy League for an independent international agency – which could be the Commission – to draw up a report on the Alpine passes between France and Italy and for, in the meantime, the Alpine tunnels to be reserved for tourist traffic and regional and inter-valley traffic, with strict limits on size and tonnage.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, my name is not on the list of those present at yesterday’s meeting, but I was present, as shown by the signatures to all my group’s meetings. I would be grateful if you could have this oversight remedied.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, in my opinion it is a positive sign that the Convention’s proposals strengthen cooperation between the Council and governments in Union decision-making. The weakest link in the proposed new Treaty is the proposals concerning the Council. Although many objected beforehand to the establishment of new institutions, the Convention is actually proposing that two new institutions should be created. The European Council is to be considered as a separate institution, and it is being proposed that it should have an external President. Both proposals are the wrong ones. The Council must be considered in the new Treaty as a single institution, and a prime minister or president who is in office must be elected as its long-term President. The Presidencies of Councils of Ministers for the various areas of policy must be shared among the representatives of more than one country. The Presidencies must be for two and a half years, and the Member States must be treated impartially when assigning them. Such a reform of the Council would correspond to the proposals that Secretary General of the European Council, Javier Solana, made over a year ago. They must be given consideration in the Intergovernmental Conference, as the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party proposes in Amendment No 28.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the Prestige disaster in Galicia has the consequences of a natural disaster, but in truth it is a political disaster. It is political because neither the Member States, nor the European Union itself, nor this Parliament were able to take appropriate measures at the time to prevent ships such as the Prestige – and there are hundreds of them – from moving around Community waters. It is political because this Parliament, despite the fact that there have been seven disasters similar to that of the Prestige over the last twenty years off the Galician coast, did not have the courage to lay down legislation similar to the United States’ Oil Pollution Act, so that we could prevent this type of vessel, which are time bombs operated by criminal capitalist mafias, from moving through these waters. At the moment therefore, Mr President, since there is no European emergency plan to deal with these problems, hundreds and hundreds of Galician vessels are trying – together with the help of many States, whom we thank – to prevent the fuel oil from entering the Galician Rias. In the Arosa Ria, 500 small vessels are trying to resolve, through small-scale methods, a problem which is the responsibility of the Spanish State and the European Union. I will end, Mr President, by saying the following: I believe that the Presidency of this Parliament should go to Galicia and demonstrate human compassion and a desire to resolve the problem which that country, like many others, is suffering from; but especially Galicia, which is suffering this problem more than anywhere else in the world, should be shown the compassion and assistance it deserves. Thank you very much.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am speaking on behalf of my colleague Mrs Figueiredo, who has had to leave. I have translated her Portuguese notes off the cuff, so I hope I shall be clear. Following the adoption by the Commission of Directive 2001/18/EC on the release into the environment of GMOs, there are serious concerns relating to health, the environment and farmers’ interests. As we know, beyond the ethical issues concerning the commercialisation and patentability of life and natural heritage, the release of GMOs into the environment is irreversible and difficult to control, and can have direct consequences for the contamination of conventional agriculture and the reduction of biodiversity. In practice, even farmers who do not cultivate genetically modified plants, due to cross-pollination or similar phenomena, are forced to label their products. This could lead to conventional farmers or organic farmers not having any choice. Therefore, in the absence of detailed studies, does the Commission not think that the precautionary principle of maintaining the moratorium in place should prevail? How should we address the labelling of products which contain GMOs due to chance or circumstances that are difficult to avoid?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, I wish to speak about regional policy and transport issues, but first let me congratulate the rapporteurs and the committee chairman on their work. Unfortunately, my news is not good news. The trans-European networks, despite the commitments made by the Essen Council, are progressing at a snail's pace. Priority works are at a standstill and the Council's response is further cuts. This being so, we in the Committee on Regional Policy and Transport wish to give our unconditional support to the amendments, also backed by the Committee on Budgets, which are designed to rectify this situation somewhat. Secondly, I also wish to express our serious concern about the disbursement of funds from the Structural Funds. We got off to a very slow start in 2000, for which the Member States were mainly to blame and the same applied in 2001. We know that the Commission is trying to do something about this and that Commissioner Barnier has tried to do something about this, especially with his recent communication and the meetings he has been holding with Ministers from the Member States. However, the Member States must do what they can. Someone commented, and I entirely agree, that the situation is worse in the rich Member States than in the poor. So they must do what they can to ensure funds are disbursed quickly and, of course, the Commission must monitor developments closely so that we can put a stop to this problem because, if things go on as they are, I am afraid that, in the end, a big chunk of Structural Fund resources will go to waste.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, having access to independent media in the context of an open and free debate is one of the most important cornerstones of a free and democratic society. This is something which the world’s dictators have always known. All societies and all States which stifle their own press are after one thing only: to silence debate and to extinguish the vital spark of democracy, which is to say the open and free society. This is now happening every day in Serbia. The few independent TV and radio stations in Serbia are being harassed and persecuted in order finally to be closed down entirely. Dissenting voices are silenced. A desperate, dictatorial leader is oppressing his own people. Mr Milosevic is threatening Montenegro, attacking the weak opposition in Serbia and infiltrating Kosovo. Mr Milosevic and his fellow criminals must be removed. Democracy must be saved. I therefore want to ask Commissioner Nielson what he and the EU are doing to ensure that Mr Milosevic is brought to justice before the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. It is to the world’s shame that Mr Milosevic has not been tried in court for his war crimes and that he is allowed to continue his attacks upon freedom, peace, democracy and the free press.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I should like to congratulate both the rapporteur and the Commissioner. We are lucky to have two committed men, both of whom realise the importance of science. I was re-reading the hearings documents on the appointment of the Commission and I was very pleased to see how far the Commission has gone towards the objectives the Commissioner set out at that time. At the moment the whole credibility of European Union Member States is at stake. They have made declarations, including the one made in Lisbon, but they have not taken the action needed to put those declarations into effect. Indeed, some Member States have done precisely the opposite of what is needed. The rapporteur, like many of us, endorses the Commission's recommendations and the action plan it has put forward. We plead with Member States to implement what they have said in their declarations. We need the Finance Ministers of the European Union to look towards the seventh framework programme and the necessary funding. We need to train and retain scientists; women scientists in particular are a wasted resource. There needs to be coordination between research infrastructure and regional policy. We must find out why countries like Sweden and Finland can do that whilst other countries cannot. We have much to learn from them. I entirely support the creation of a European Research Council to give some coordination and coherence to our work, particularly in basic research. A recent meeting with astronauts made me more aware of the potential for science in Europe if we take the messages of the Lisbon declaration seriously. Almost all of us know them off by heart, but Member States have so far taken very little action on them. Congratulations again to Mr Linkohr and to Mr Busquin.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, having spoken yesterday evening on European citizenship, I am pleased to be able to speak this morning, on behalf of the Group, on the matter of the European area of education and learning. The link is clear, and was, furthermore, emphasised by the Feira European Council, where it was stated that ‘education and lifelong learning are an essential policy for the development of citizenship’. Ladies and gentlemen, as everyone has said, education and learning must be accessible to everyone so that everyone has the same opportunities to find their place in society. As we know, however, we are a long way from achieving this objective. Inequalities become clear as soon as children enter the educational system, and are responsible for many academic failures, before breeding social exclusion in later life. This is a downward spiral and hence the vital importance of adopting a coordinated strategy at European level which provides access for every European citizen to a decent and sufficient minimum standard of education and of learning. The Commission communication attempts to respond to this ambitious project. Several proposals are, furthermore, of the greatest interest, even if they would benefit from being clarified and complemented by the provisions contained in Mrs Van Brempt’s report, on which we are about to vote. We welcome the fact that the Commission is advocating the right of every citizen, including those who have left school early, to acquire basic skills via free compensatory learning in later life. We also support the idea that the Commission should, working closely with the Member States, put in place a European framework to define the basic skills that all pupils have to have acquired. With regard to training, I support the request for the Commission to implement clear strategies with adequate funding for the chapter concerning lifelong learning. Finally, in order to create a European area of education, equal opportunities in the field of education and training must be guaranteed for everyone, in particular for women, through close cooperation between all the social actors concerned. Furthermore, the integration programmes designed for immigrants should exist even for pre-school pupils. I shall finish by very warmly congratulating Mrs Van Brempt on her work and her report and by pointing out that education and lifelong learning are not only a social necessity but a major social right too.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, Romano Prodi recently stated that recovery in Germany and Italy is non-existent, which means that this year will see a continuation of all the same old uncertainties, doubts and risks as to economic recovery in the euro zone. All this statement does is carry over the pessimistic forecasts made by the Commission for 2004 into the political field. This then is the background against which we must analyse how Europe’s economic situation develops in the framework of the broad economic policy guidelines. We cannot continue to dodge the issue. We do in fact have at our disposal powerful theoretical instruments, such as those resulting from the Lisbon Strategy or arising from the good practice associated with economic policy coordination. We also have powerful limitations, however, such as those resulting from too strict an interpretation of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), which demolish all the efforts we make. The issue is becoming more and more political, or, put another way, a matter of choices, and while it is true that there can only be long-term, sustainable economic development with financial consolidation, it is also true that there will be no financial consolidation, even in the short term, without economic growth. Europe needs a new agenda, focusing on the problems of the economy and employment, in place of the current agenda, focusing on the budget deficit and public spending, which have become a veritable obsession. What Europe really needs is structural reforms, but it also needs the financial means to carry them through. In the early stages there will always be an increase in public spending or a reduction in revenue, and that can only be possible with a profound change in the budgetary rules in force. It is at this point that delays begin to occur to the proposals for a review of the Stability and Growth Pact announced by the Commission, especially if these proposals focus on the essence and are not confined to sweetening the regulatory aspects of control. Reform of the SGP is inevitable, partly because this instrument has, strictly speaking, been suspended since 25 November. The new rules can no longer ignore the changes in the economic cycle, or fail to take account of each Member State’s individual situation without prejudice to the efforts to achieve budget conciliation for the whole euro zone. They certainly can no longer ignore the role of public investment and quality spending in the framework of development. Aiming at a zero budget deficit in the euro zone over the long term is complete folly, is not supported by any economic theory and would result in the absurdity of a public debt that would, after all, be no better than zero. I believe these concerns are to be found in the excellent report tabled by Mrs Christa Randzio-Plath, to whom I offer my warmest wishes, because the dealings I have had with her over the last three years have shown her to be a woman who is capable, competent, determined and profoundly pro-European.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the European Court of Justice is rightly seen as the guardian of Community law, but also, and especially, as safeguarding and furthering the four traditional fundamental freedoms – of goods, persons, services and capital – all of which are relevant to the matter under discussion. It was not all that long ago that the European Court of Justice had to weigh in the balance the fundamental freedoms on the one hand and, on the other, the protests by people for whom the effects of the transit routes through Austria have all become too much. They sat down in the road and said, ‘it can not go on like this’. Like many of those who have already spoken here today, the defenders of European freedoms talked up the supreme importance of their position. The Court of Justice saw these things differently, adducing the remarkable argument that the freedoms, though important, are not everything. Of equal value to them, it said, were the basic rights of citizens, in this specific case the freedom to express opinions and to demonstrate, and – as can be read in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which we hope is shortly to be given added weight as Part II of the European Constitution – so was the requirement that the environment be protected in general and in what are termed vulnerable regions in particular. This obligation is to be protected, being of equal importance to European freedoms and on a level with them. It is unfortunate that Parliament, at first reading stage, did not see it as really important that the right to free transport should be balanced against the rights of people and of the environment on transit routes. Nearly all the Members from the fourteen Member States that are not affected insisted on their rights, aiming to do away with the transit arrangement, and the law of the jungle prevailed. I hope, indeed I ask, that at least some of you will, when you vote tomorrow, also listen to the other side and consider their rights too. To these Members, we Austrians have made an offer in the form of Amendments Nos 18 and 19, to which reference has already been made, in the hope that they will vote for them. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, with regard to Amendment No 32, I would like to clarify that the correct version is the Spanish version, not the German version – in which there seems to be a degree of confusion in the translation – and that it refers exclusively to minors, not to other relatives of the person in question. (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** President. – That concludes the vote. IN THE CHAIR: MR ONTAVice-President EXPLANATIONS OF VOTE - Turco report (A5-0107/2003)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as a Member for a peripheral maritime region, I would also like to express my solidarity with the Galician fishermen affected by the Prestige ecological disaster. Secondly, I would like to say, as a member of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, and a substitute member of the Committee on Fisheries, that four aspects are significantly affected by this disaster. I would therefore like the Commission and in particular the rapporteur, Mr Izquierdo Collado, to ensure that this White Paper on transport takes into account, for the year 2010, something that concerns me and that a Member from the Canaries, Mr Medina, mentioned to me today: the failure by many ships, both Community and other, to follow routes which avoid the exclusive economic zones in certain regions, such as Galicia.

Political group: ELDR