GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, in mediaeval times groups of thugs and hooligans would pick on elderly women and accuse them of witchcraft. They would throw them into the village pond. If the poor souls drowned, they were shown to be innocent; if they survived, it proved their guilt and they were then burned at the stake. Either way, the result is the same. We had a similar example in 20th century China during the Cultural Revolution. Red Guards would accuse intellectuals of bourgeois thinking. If they confessed, they were guilty – but, of course, redeemable – but if they denied the charge, they were condemned out of their own mouths because they failed to recognise their guilt. In both of those cases, we see the danger of placing the burden of proof on the accused. Our justice systems have always rightly placed the burden of proof on the accuser, not on the defendant. They have always assumed that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Now, in 21st century Europe, we are proposing to abandon this fundamental principle of justice and instead to adopt the approach of the mediaeval witch-finders and the Chinese Red Guards. We propose to put the burden of proof on the defendant, and we even have amendments that would further pass the benefit of doubt to the accuser and not to the accused. Then there is the issue of malicious allegations – in which, sadly, we have seen a huge increase – putting a lot of employers to great expense and to great cost. My own party was accused by a lot of left-wingers of racism because it spoke out on the issue of asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom. (Heckling) In the case of employers, even if an employer manages to mount a successful defence to these unjustified cases, the time and anxiety of a tribunal or a court hearing will be a huge imposition. Given the bias of this legislation in favour of the accuser and the prevailing climate of political correctness that we seem to be obsessed with, even many innocent employers will frequently lose their cases, incurring penalties, as well as court costs and lost time. This legislation, I am sorry to say, is an invitation to trouble makers and those with chips on their shoulders to bring frivolous and vexatious complaints, or possibly to use even the threat of a complaint to secure financial compensation. (Heckling) There is, of course, another danger, and that is that employers, aware of the risk of complaints from unsuccessful ethnic minority candidates, may even avoid putting them on short lists altogether, which would be a terrible disaster and completely against the spirit of the legislation. As so often in this House, we have failed to think through the possible unintended consequences. This legislation is unnecessary at a European level. Most Member States already have their own anti-discrimination measures designed to suit their own culture and their own circumstances. I am proud to say that I am opposed to discrimination and racism in all its forms, but this irrational and unjust legislation will bring Europe further into disrepute among many of my constituents. I am pleased to say that the rest of my delegation will be joining me in opposing it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I voted for the González Álvarez measure on the regulation on the monitoring of carbon dioxide emissions from new passenger cars. Why am I in favour of this measure? It goes without saying that I support the monitoring of new passenger cars when they are first placed on the market, but my vote in favour of the motion also contains a call to make greater efforts in the monitoring of second-hand cars, for, in actual fact, I would argue that new cars are never to be found on the road due to the fact that the very act of driving them along a road ages them by definition. It is, above all, ‘old’ cars, the cars which have been in use for a number of years, which cause atmospheric pollution. I call for monitoring of these ‘old’ cars, to ensure that they are always in a state of good health and to prevent them from harming the earth’s atmosphere. I therefore support the use and preservation of pensioner cars as well.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I had asked the Commission whether it intended to submit a proposal on conditions for the setting up, and mutual recognition of, debt-collecting agencies in Europe. I appreciate that this does not fall within the remit of the Commissioner and that he is unable to provide me with an answer right now. But I would like to receive a reply in due course, because this issue has been the subject of many a discussion in previous meetings.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is a great honour and privilege for me to be one of the first Polish Members to address the House after the Union’s enlargement. This is an historic occasion, and I am particularly pleased to be speaking on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party , the largest group in the European Parliament, and a group that has made a major contribution to the enlargement of Europe. The enlarged European Union is generating great hopes, not only among the old Member States, but also among the new countries joining the European Union. This is particularly true in the case of my own country, Poland. The Polish people have painful experience of the dark era of communism and nationalism. They know how much hard work had to be done in order to join the European Union. We had to make up for the several decades during which we had fallen behind because we were on the other side. Today we are discussing the future of Europe. We hope to endorse and adopt the European Constitution. This is needed in order for us to be able to manage Europe efficiently and for us to take decisions efficiently. For this step to have real significance, it must be adopted through compromise, with the consent of all the nations making up the European Union. It is also essential to remember our roots, the basis on which European civilisation was built. A Europe that forgets its roots cannot have a future. Some of the views expressed in the course of this debate have caused concern. There seems to be an attempt to create a two-speed Europe and to forge deeper alliances within the framework of the European Union. We cannot go along with this. There has been an attempt to establish false standards of what being European means. These are not good omens. They reinforce the political strength of the Euro-sceptics which is most certainly not our intention. The European venture is not yet complete. New states are waiting at our doors. Soon Bulgaria and Romania will join. It is also important to keep in mind Ukraine and our neighbours in the Balkans. Much remains to be done. I hope wise decisions will be taken to strengthen Europe as a whole and each nation individually. I am sure we all aspire to a Europe of peace, in which the differences between societies and economies are minimal. We long for a Europe in which richer countries will help poorer countries. We hope that Europe will stand up to threats such as terrorism. We would like Europe to be a strong and efficiently managed international organisation. Finally, we want Europe to continue to honour Christian values, human dignity, tradition, and morality.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, to paraphrase words first uttered 500 years ago now spirits have awakened, and life has again become a pleasure. I recall these words today, first, to infuse optimism into those who are reluctant to rejoice in enlargement, and second, in order to draw attention to the need to create a new social order. Like a table, this order must have at least three legs. It needs an economic leg and a political leg. It also needs a cultural leg which must be equally strong. Without it, no table will stand, not even a round table like the one we sat round in Poland in the past. This is the conclusion I bring to integration based on Poland’s latest experiences. When I refer to culture, I have in mind all areas of human self-realisation. I am thinking of the theatre, school, office; stadiums, an honest market, along with Parliament, and the Polish parliament in particular. The Renaissance, Baroque, Enlightenment, Romanticism, and now Postmodernism are all bidding to be involved in the creation of the order I mentioned. Many artists, writers, and intellectuals also wish to be involved. They want to bring their creativity to bear on the political creation of a European identity. This will take years to accomplish. It is an exceedingly difficult task, particularly as regards ensuring the security of the culture of a multilingual Europe. Today we are debating difficulties related to partnership with our neighbours. I can identify a range of aspects of the relationship with our eastern neighbours. There is warm friendship and cold acquisitive greed. There is also mutual fascination and ethnic animosity, which poisons the intelligentsia. I have personal experience of all these, and so do many millions of the citizens of Central Europe. We know all about destruction and establishing new borders that are an affront to logic, morality, and dignity. (Abbreviated in accordance with Rule 120 of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the European Parliament proved its worth by establishing a temporary committee to assess the causes and consequences of the Prestige oil tanker disaster and to make proposals to increase safety at sea. The institution thus carried out its responsibility for political monitoring of what was and continues to be a European disaster that goes beyond the limits of a single Member State and took on board the consequences by promoting the sea traffic policy, which is the responsibility of Community and international bodies, although the decisions to implement it are left in the hands of the leaders of the Member States. Talking of the Member States, Parliament has had to put up with hijacking manoeuvres and a lack of cooperation on the part of those who were then in charge of the Spanish Government. It is usual practice in Parliament’s temporary committees for ministers to give their points of view. This was not the case and the majority of the groups feel that between 13 and 19 November 2001 hasty and badly thought out decisions were taken which resulted in an accident turning into the greatest environmental disaster in Europe of the last few decades. After five months of hearings we are still wondering what made the Spanish authorities in charge order that the vessel be removed to the high seas. As the European Parliament stated in its resolution last year, this decision considerably increased the proportions of the disaster. My group is tabling several amendments, but following on from Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna’s speech, I would like to say that, while we think that Amendment No 2 from the Group is entirely superfluous and we are neither in favour or against it, we, and myself in particular, as a Galician and vice-chair of the Committee on Fisheries, think that Amendment No 1 is irrelevant and, what is more, dangerous, because no one has questioned the rigour of the scientific testing or the healthiness of the food chain. We would not have opposed an amendment to remove the word overfishing – if the honourable Member thinks it is so serious – although we still believe that the original wording of paragraph 50 is entirely inoffensive, as it only mentions the risk and the possibility of overfishing and in no way claims that it is already the case. I will say once again, however, that we are not entirely in favour, and we will therefore vote against, because we think it is quite dangerous to bring back the ghost now and question the rigour of the scientific tests and the healthiness of the food chain.

Political group: PSE
Cambodia has a horrifying and violent past. The Cambodian people deserve a peaceful future. This is why it is of great importance that the forthcoming elections should proceed in a fair and peaceful manner. Moreover, the mass slaughterers should not escape their sentences. My group has concerns on both counts. We are receiving many reports on atrocities being committed in connection with the elections. The Cambodian People's Party is omnipresent and the authorities go out of their way to intimidate the people, particularly at local level. It seems that they can do this undisturbed and unpunished. The electronic media are also in the hands of Prime Minister Hun Sen's party. My group is particularly anxious that Sam Rainsy's party will not be given a fair chance as a result. Given his great courage and his merits in respect of a democratic Cambodia, Sam Rainsy deserves the Sakharov prize. The human rights situation is still bad. It is also regrettable indeed that, despite considerable amounts of European aid, economic and social development is stagnating. We are in favour of linking this aid to progress in the field of pluralism, human rights and free elections. After all, democratisation and prosperity cannot be seen in isolation from one another. We have to put the past behind us by doing now what is necessary to ensure a rich future for the poor Cambodian people.

Political group: ELDR
The European area of security and justice must be integrated into the Treaty on European Union and thus bind the new candidate countries. International cooperation in the field of justice and the fight against all forms of crime, including terrorism, must be intensified. Citizens are free within the Union, but they may also become a victim of an offence in one of the Member States. The initiative, which consists of setting up a network of contact points aimed at creating an institutionalised forum for the permanent exchange of information and theoretical and practical knowledge concerning restorative justice, is part of this movement.

Political group: ELDR
This report concerns a private and sensitive subject for many women who, either for aesthetic or medical reasons, have had breast implant operations carried out. We support the idea that all patients involved should be provided with information about risks, alternative options and post-operative investigations. At the same time, we are convinced that this can be done other than through privacy-invading, compulsory registration, which is a measure we do not believe to be in accordance with our approach to politics. What is more, certain parts of the report concern patient issues, which do not come within the EU’s area of competence. In our view, breast implants are therefore an issue, important though it is, that is better dealt with at national level. We have therefore chosen to vote against the report as such.

Political group: ELDR
We feel Mrs Sandbaek, Mrs Martens and Mrs Ferrer’s work is satisfactory, considering the different starting points. We should always be mindful of our ability to produce texts which require respect for human rights, inviolability, self-determination and responsibilisation of the individual as a priority. The violent practice of abortion should therefore be excluded as a general means of family planning. A regulation whose objective is to protect health cannot contradict itself and attack life, the supreme good of the individual from the moment of conception. Another general consideration is countries’ approach to these instruments, which reflect the responsibility that every State, every community and every individual should feel to protect life. With the help of the donor countries, the governments of the developing countries must provide information, education and appropriate instruments and encourage responsibilisation of the individual, to free people from ignorance, taboos, superstition and the archaic practices which go hand in hand with underdevelopment. My last point concerns the issue of the subordination of women to men. The culture of the hierarchy of force must be eliminated once and for all during the Third Millennium. The Third Millennium is characterised by the culture of information and knowledge and, therefore, must provide the conditions for free exchange between minds. Women must be able to dialogue with men without being affected by any form of sexism.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, the series of climate summits that began seven years ago with Rio has produced some fine resolutions which have been full of aims ever more ambitious than those that came before. The time for real action has not yet got under way, however, nor has it even begun. Achieving demanding aims is not childsplay, as some people in this Chamber seem to assume. In its resolutions, Parliament should not give priority to certain types of measures at the expense of others. All possible means of reducing emissions have to be adopted immediately. In particular, this means trading emissions quotas, which is an effective way of reducing emissions, if clear rules based on the mechanisms of a market economy are established. It is also very important that we do not limit our range of options by excluding the flexible mechanisms of carbon dioxide-free nuclear power. The argument that says nuclear energy is not a sustainable means of producing energy, on account of the waste it produces, and cannot thus be included in the clean development mechanisms, is simply not tenable. The nuclear power industry is the only energy business sector that has incorporated the costs associated with the entire lifespan of its product in its prices, and thus takes full responsibility for the safe depositing of its waste. I would like to remind those Members here who continue to speak against nuclear power from one debate to the next that, but for the current level of nuclear energy being used, carbon dioxide emissions would immediately grow by 800 million tons every year. We will not mention what sort of effects there would be if the world’s additional needs for energy were fully met without building more nuclear power plants. Giving up the use of nuclear power may be a subject for populists in the developed countries of Europe, or here in Parliament, where it really is a populist subject, but the realistic alternative is nowhere else to be found, not even in those countries the Union is going to embrace in the future.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the establishment of a common strategy between the European Union and Latin America, as decided in Rio de Janeiro in 1999, is a matter of justice that will finally give the appropriate dimension to interregional relationships that have historically been undervalued. The Socialist Group in the Committee on Development and Cooperation agrees with the objectives set out in the resolution proposed by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy, for which I would like to congratulate Mr Salafranca. In our opinion, we need to increase the content of the political agenda and deepen dialogue at all political and institutional levels, within the framework of a true partnership. We think that the signing of association agreements with the Andean Community and Central America is necessary, with the aim of creating a Euro-Latin American free trade area. We also consider, however, that we need to give priority to the resolution of development problems in many Latin American countries, where there are 200 million poor people. We are particularly concerned about the Andean area, Central America and the Caribbean. In the Andean area, instability, institutional violence, problems of drug trafficking and the management of migratory flows have to be dealt with from a global perspective, that integrates development cooperation, trade liberalisation, institutional transformation, human rights and the rights of indigenous peoples in particular. The creation of a Euro-Latin American area of peace and stability has to be founded upon the principles of human rights, democracy and the fight against drug trafficking. In Central America, aid to social development and the fight against poverty have to take precedence over any other initiative, such as the information society. To do otherwise would be to put the cart before the horse. I would also like to make a special reference to the Caribbean and, specifically, to Cuba, as have other Members this morning. Cuba is not part of the Cotonu Agreement nor does it have an institutionalised relationship with the European Union. We think that development potential in Cuba, where, for some time, European companies have been investing, and the situation of its people merit treatment from the European Union that goes much further than the indifference it has shown to this country until now.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, as rapporteur on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, I would like to congratulate both rapporteurs on their report and I would also like to thank them for the pleasant cooperation. I would like to raise two points. Firstly, my Committee is of the opinion that in the field of trade policy, the European Community’s authority and also, therefore, the European Commission’s negotiating mandate must be reinforced. So too, however, must be the role of Parliament. This can be done a) by introducing codecision for the common trade policy, b) by introducing an assent procedure for all external agreements and c) by according Parliament a greater role in approving and monitoring trade negotiations. My second point concerns energy. The Commission has concluded that a coherent European energy policy has been lacking in the past. There are no clear guidelines on institutional mechanisms for defining a common energy policy, let alone cooperation to guarantee the supply of energy or in terms of the environmental aspects of energy policy. With a view to sustainable development, a new chapter on energy policy must be included in the Treaty, as well as the relevant sections of the ECSC and EURATOM Treaties. In addition, the European Parliament powers must be adequately enhanced. This means that the codecision procedure needs to apply to the EURATOM Treaty too. It will specifically need to apply to the drafting of minimum safety standards for the design, construction and operation of nuclear reactors within the Union. So far, the Member States have had their own technical standards and regulations. In the light of Central and Eastern countries joining the EU, it is vital that uniform, European safety standards for nuclear reactors be drafted. Unfortunately, my proposal to this effect has not been included in the current report. I would therefore urge you most emphatically to vote for Amendment No 60 which I have tabled on behalf of my group, so that uniform safety standards can be drawn up for nuclear reactors. We owe this to our citizens.

Political group: ELDR