GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Duhamel report has provided us, the European Parliament, with the opportunity, barely two months before the European Council in Nice, to reiterate our position on the further development of the European Union, and in so doing to take account of the need for the EU to become primed for action on the enlargement front over the next few years, as well as to demonstrate to our citizens the medium-term prospects of the European Union. Commissioner Barnier, you made this point a moment ago, and rightly so. The Group of the European People’s Party and will therefore use its large majority to vote in favour of Olivier Duhamel’s outstanding report, which focuses on the essential aspects. During the first phase, we will need a constitutional treaty that will amalgamate the existing foundations of the Treaties of the European Union currently in force, in a clear and comprehensible manner. At the same time, however, this constitutional treaty should be elaborated in such a way that it renders the common values of the European Union comprehensible, incorporates the fundamental rights of the European citizens laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and improves the composition, role, and modus operandi of the European Union’s bodies, looking beyond the Nice Summit, thereby improving their efficiency. What this European constitution will also need to do is clearly establish the distribution of tasks between the Member States and the European Union, inject the dynamism of European integration into those areas where it is badly needed, and provide for joint action to be taken, for example in the sphere of foreign and security policy. It is also important, in this context, to respect and safeguard the lowest layer of democracy and local self-administration in the EU Member States. We must not, as has already happened with a number of directives, end up with an interplay of European and national bureaucracies which restricts and overrides the citizen’s ability to shape policy at a local level. We therefore propose that local self-administration should form an integral part of a future European constitution and would urge you to endorse this proposed amendment.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, you will not believe this but, the day before yesterday, I met a group of young Ukrainians who, when they heard that I often talk about the problems of pensioners, almost begged me, with one voice: ‘did you know that in the Ukraine pensioners are really, really badly off? Why is it that you in the European Union are not doing anything about the fate of the pensioners in Ukraine? The pensioners in our country lived under the communist regime for many years, when they were young workers. They had neither freedom nor democracy, their lives consisted of work and nothing else. Now communism has fallen and they are left with a miserable pension which is not even enough to buy a couple of pints of milk a day. We expect a great deal from you: you must concern yourselves with our elderly people as well as our economy, or else they will wish the communists had never left.’

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is usual to begin a speech by saying thank you for a job well done. In my case, it is impossible to do that because I think that Mrs Theorin’s report ought to be rejected. I also think that the draftsperson of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities is on shaky ground when she maintains that there is broad support for a report adopted on the basis of eight votes in favour and five against. It is an insult to Parliament to use an own-initiative report to push issues not covered by the mandate. Mrs Theorin was to write an own-initiative report on women’s participation in peaceful conflict resolution. Instead, the report deals with everything from the conditions experienced by women in refugee camps to the ways in which women develop strength and active influence. In her eagerness to oppose everything that is evil, systematic rape and sexual slavery are condemned. I for my part want to condemn all rape and all slavery. There are points in the report, for example the issue of the various diplomatic corps, which might well be suited to a report that could be seriously discussed across all the committees, with parties concerned with foreign and security policy also involved in the discussion. Mrs Theorin fought for a long time to stop Sweden becoming a member of the European Union. Now, she is suddenly campaigning for the EU to determine which officials our foreign administration is to appoint. There is a lack of consistency here. Let us instead make conflict resolution an issue through which the conditions for peace at all levels and involving all players can be strengthened, rather than getting bogged down in gender issues. I strongly object to the attitude of mind, expressed in this Chamber this evening, whereby one sex is made collectively guilty. I think it is an insult to all those men who have died to defend freedom, peace and democracy in their own countries or in the context of peacekeeping efforts. To create antagonism between the sexes, as there is a determination to do in this Chamber this evening, is neither peaceful nor constructive in my view. That is why I and many others in addition to myself intend voting against this report tomorrow. I do not, in fact, consider it to be a serious piece of work.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I begin by congratulating Mr Deva on what I believe is a comprehensive, balanced and meaningful set of proposals. I particularly welcome his resolution because it restates our commitment to the principles of special and differential treatment of developing countries, to the importance of food security and to enhancing the accountability and social responsibility of corporations. The rapporteur's last point, the proposal for a European Forum of Enterprises in paragraphs 61 to 63, is an interesting one. But it should not deflect the Commission from ensuring that the current CSR Forum that it is due to launch in October fully addresses the actions of European enterprises in developing countries. I want to make two substantive arguments in this debate. First, it is right to record in a report by the Committee on Development and Cooperation that we can enunciate all the EU development policies we like, but too often these have been submerged beneath the EU's own trade and commercial interests when it really matters. We remember the hypocrisy of the Commission and Member States in regard to the free trade agreement negotiations with South Africa. Initial responses to Mr Fischler's proposals on CAP reform, limited as they are, and current reports from Johannesburg suggest that Mr Byrne's words about the phasing-out of agricultural export subsidies may well be an empty promise. If only the EU sought reform in the WTO with the same vigour it has won the USD 4 billion trade sanctions against the United States in relation to our steel exports, perhaps the poorest countries would start to believe us when we say we want a development round. Secondly, as other speakers have made clear, we have direct responsibility as the trade negotiations start with our ACP colleagues. Commissioner Byrne, when talking about the economic partnership agreements, should answer the questions that the Commission has refused to answer, before the process begins. Why does the Commission fail to talk now about the alternatives which were written into the Cotonou Agreement? Why does it talk about capacity building but commit only 0.1% of the current NIPs for trade support? How can we have confidence in the sustainability impact assessment when the Commission could not agree amongst itself on the impact of Everything But Arms on the sugar sector? Finally, why does the Commission resist the proposal from the ACP heads of government in Fiji to enter an initial phase of negotiations on principles with the ACP Group as a whole? Is it that the Commission wants to use the old tactic of divide and rule by attacking the solidarity of the ACP Group? That is not what this European Parliament wants.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the motion for a resolution on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables, especially dried fruit and nuts, is most opportune and we should give it our full support. The present economic climate has dangerously upset the delicate competitive balance for Community producers in this sector and the Commission needs to react immediately in order to prevent them from going under altogether. We are all aware of the importance of this sector, of which previous speakers have painted a dramatic picture. The facts of the matter, and the present economic climate which I referred to earlier are as follows, especially for our products. As you know, the devaluation of the Turkish lira, on the one hand, and the particularly aggressive policy of other producers, such as the USA, on the other, have put Community producers in a most unfortunate position. So what are we proposing in order to help the Commission? That programmes and aid which are about to expire be extended and that urgent, effective support be given to Community producers and ways be found of supporting producers, especially in the present economic climate. I also want to point out, as other speakers have done, that the producers of these products, especially dried fruit and nuts, are small, poor producers and, more specifically, Mediterranean producers. Their organisations fall short when it comes to pooling their products and competing with their own resources on this difficult market, as I mentioned earlier. So what we want, in addition to any other measures, is for special attention to be paid to producer organisations and for ways to be found of supporting them, so that they can organise themselves efficiently and deal with the problem. So I too am adamant. We must vote in favour of this motion for a resolution and we want the Commission to respond to this concern on our part. ***

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I want to return to the question of the agenda and of Mr Wuermeling’s report. We have given some thought to how we might resolve this problem at once without changing the agenda and have come to a conclusion that I think even Mrs Thors would agree to. I hereby move that the Wuermeling report be moved up to the first item on the agenda; I would ask you to announce it now, and notify you here and now that I will then move that it be referred back to the committee straight away.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the directive now before us forms part of a whole area of legislation to promote the use of renewable energy sources in different sectors, and therefore represents some of the several and various measures to implement the Community strategy for sustainable development adopted at the Gothenburg European Council in June 2001. The directive is especially important because developments in this very area of transport up till now have been absolutely pitiful. My colleague, Mrs Ayuso González, has really done an excellent job. Transport accounts for more than 30% of the end use of energy in the Community and that figure is growing all the time. This trend will become stronger still and there will therefore be an increase in carbon dioxide emissions. This increase will be still greater in the candidate countries, relatively speaking. According to the Commission’s White Paper, carbon dioxide emissions associated with transport are estimated to increase by 50% over the period 1990–2010, and the main source of emissions is road traffic, which accounts for 84% of carbon dioxide emissions connected with transport. This is why the White Paper is calling for less dependence on oil by the transport sector, for ecological reasons. This is currently at a rate of 98% and would be reduced by using alternative biofuel-like fuels. Promoting the use of biofuels in keeping with sustainable farming and forestry practices will create new opportunities for sustainable rural development. This could play a part in the creation of new jobs in rural areas. Moreover, it will be possible to obtain by-products, which, owing to their vegetable protein-rich content, could be used as animal feed. Growing plants for biofuel production would have to be combined with current programmes for cultivation, adhering to the principle of crop rotation. To guarantee the existence of sustainable cultivation practices we should nevertheless draw up a set of clear environmental criteria so that, for example, using the same cultivated area later on for food production does not pose a risk. The timetable approved by the Council only contains two targets with binding dates. These must not be forgotten.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, a debate on fishing and poverty is not simple. And, since the rapporteur belongs to the Group of the , Mr Lannoye’s efforts towards synthesis are all the more creditable. Poverty is the world’s main problem today and it unfortunately will continue to be so for many years. For some of the poorest countries in the world, fishing is one of their main resources; in fact, for many of them, it is their only economic resource. Mozambique receives 75% of its total income from the export of crustaceans, and this is a perfect example of a model of sustainable development. The rapporteur, Mr Lannoye, should be credited with proposing a realistic text, which retains a laudable dose of utopianism. I must say that the Commission’s proposal is coherent with the objective of responding to European interests, while making it compatible with a frame of reference for the development of countries for which fishing is an essential resource in their fight against poverty. I have mentioned the case of Mozambique, but it would be unfair not to say that there are other very positive aspects to this African country’s efforts to move forward, and there are other African countries which are acting well in relation to fishing, such as Namibia, to give but one example. It seems pertinent to insist on the need for the Union to be especially careful in complying with the code of conduct for responsible fishing, to which we are committed as members of the FAO. We must wait for the authorities of the developing countries to make the same effort. It is true that certain practices – as Mr Lannoye has mentioned – in certain specific cases of Community operators are unacceptable, but it is also the case that, sometimes, these practices would not be possible without the cooperation of the local operators involved. This problem is serious and complex and I therefore repeat that the efforts of the Commission and the rapporteur are creditable in that they offer us a balanced approach to it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, allow me to start by agreeing with everything Mrs Jackson and many of my fellow Members have said and to focus on a number of points. As everyone has pointed out, we have the legislation. The problem lies in incorporating and applying this legislation. Of course, the political will must be there but it depends mainly on the monitoring carried out by your office, Commissioner. If, for example, you receive repeated complaints, instead of dealing with them through time-consuming correspondence, you should take a persistent and decisive stand and make sure the legislation really is implemented. And if we have cause to go to the European Court, then let us do so and, if sanctions need to be imposed, then we shall do that too. As Mrs Jackson has said, Greece is already paying EUR 20 000 a day and I trust that Greece will come to its senses and fall into line. I should particularly like to draw your attention to Directive 92/43 on Natura 2000 areas. We should not allow projects to go ahead in these areas with a light heart, because Article 6 of the directive says that only in the absence of alternative solutions should a project be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest in Natura 2000 areas. And here again I would remind you that in an area of Greece, in the area of Fthiotida, where everyone is against bridging the Maliako Gulf which, it should be noted the Ministry of the Environment and Public Works itself included in the Natura 2000 areas, your office has received complaints about the Greek Government's intention to build this bridge, which will have a huge environmental impact, even though alternative solutions exist. I shall be monitoring – and I welcome the undertaking which you took in your intervention and I hope that it is a real undertaking – what happens in all the areas in Europe which are Natura 2000 areas including, of course, the Maliako Gulf, where there are plans to build a bridge which will wipe out an important habitat.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, there is no doubt that nuclear power installations are not wholly safe from terrorist attacks. No reactor could withstand the impact of a Boeing 747. It would simply be wrong to assert anything else. What is true of nuclear installations, though, is also true of other technological systems. Mr Vitorino rightly pointed out that even a dam can be destroyed, and the Second World War shows that the consequences can be devastating. An attack on a gasometer, such as can be found in the heart of our towns, could be positively appalling. I might mention that some pressurised gasometers already operate at a lower pressure for safety reasons. If methane were to escape from a high-pressure holder – a heavy machine-gun would suffice to bring that about – and spread over the town, then once it mixed to a certain degree with the surrounding air, the town would simply burn to the ground. Accidents of this sort have occurred in the past; thank God we have managed to avoid them in the past ten years. The same applies to the water supply. It is relatively straightforward to poison water. We can all imagine how immense the consequences of that would be. Now, I accept that many in our countries are opposed to nuclear energy, and that, in some countries, they may well be in the majority. Although it is not an opinion that I share, it is one that I respect. This argument, based on the risk of terrorist attacks, could lead us to get rid of the gas industry or stop drinking water, and I find that absurd. My conclusion simply follows the line taken by the Commission. I admit it is not likely to make very good press copy, but it does have the advantage of being sensible. We should identify the dangerous sites and improve the protection of targets. Perhaps we should also take other security measures, but these must be implemented without delay. Studies are something we do not need. Mr President, please allow me a final word. We should not give the impression of total security. That can be had only at the price of total surveillance, which cannot be reconciled with a free state under the rule of law.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to make a personal statement pursuant to Rule 122, which allows the speaker three minutes. I shall not abuse the Rule. Yesterday, an Italian news agency reported a letter sent to President Fontaine by Mr Tajani regarding the speeches made during the debate of the Extraordinary Council of 21 September by Mr Barón Crespo and myself. First of all, I would ask you to check and find out whether the President received this letter. In addition, I gather from the agency – because I have not read the letter – that our President is being asked to do something improper, which is to take an initiative in defence of the Italian Parliament. I do not know with what prerogative the President of the European Parliament could do so. I also assume that the Presidents of the Italian Parliament should be perfectly able to defend their own institutions. I should like to make it clear, then, that neither Mr Barón Crespo nor I made any attack on that Parliament. We did, however, point out what seemed to be extremely inconsistent behaviour on the part of the Italian Government, for, at Brussels, it did not submit any reservation when signing the action plan against terrorism at the close of the Extraordinary Council, nor did it raise any objection of the kind in the Justice and Home Affairs Council, and yet Italy is promoting a law which makes judicial cooperation much more difficult. The latter fact has been noted by prominent jurists, the international press and also, today, by the American judge, Mr Calabresi, head of the Court of Appeal in New York, who says that Italy is setting out in the opposite direction to that taken by the United States and the whole international community. In any case, we freely expressed an opinion. In the debate, Mr Tajani did the same, refuting these arguments with arguments of his own. At this point, I frankly cannot see what our President should do other than uphold the prerogative of this Parliament, which, pursuant to Rule 2, guarantees the independence of the parliamentary mandate, and as neither I nor Mr Barón Crespo have violated any rule of behaviour laid down in the Rules of Procedure, I think Mrs Fontaine should do nothing. It also seems odd to me that Mr Tajani should complain about alleged interference and then ask the President to do the same. Having said that, I should like you, Mr President, to inform Mrs Fontaine that, before the end of this part-session, we would like to know if and how she intends to respond to Mr Tajani’s letter.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I congratulate the Commission on its initiative and Mrs Honeyball on her excellent report. Today the taxation of passenger cars in the Union is undoubtedly, as we say in Catalan, a real calaix de sastre, in other words, a ‘rag bag’. As the report rightly emphasises, the functioning of the internal market is affected by the diversity, the heterogeneity and sometimes the complexity of tax systems. The Commission and the report are, therefore, quite right to address this issue, in order to ensure that competition takes place in the best conditions possible. Indeed, it appears extremely appropriate to consider taxing the use of vehicles rather than their acquisition, and the Commission is, therefore, right to propose abolishing the vehicle registration tax and establishing or increasing taxes on circulation, fuel and the use of some road infrastructures. We need to give priority to environmental criteria in order to achieve the Kyoto objectives, as the report rightly reminds us. On the other hand, as regards diesel vehicles, I agree with Mrs Honeyball that they should benefit in terms of taxation. Studies in this field appear to conclude that emissions from diesel engines are generally lower than emissions from other types of engine. The logical consequence of the ‘polluter pays’ principle would be to levy less tax on something that pollutes less. We must never forget, however, that from the environmental point of view and also for geopolitical reasons, the final objective must be to replace current fuels with non-contaminating and non-conflicting sources of energy. To this end, we should welcome all research efforts conducted into new energies, such as hydrogen.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Would you be prepared to make some sort of recommendation with a view to preventing the negative impact of enlargement on the Mediterranean? In truth, through his actions and proposals, Mr Fischler, the Commissioner responsible for Agriculture, has made the anti-Mediterranean impact of enlargement a reality. It is a fact that the whole of the Mediterranean area is frightened about this. As I can see that the Council is standing firm in its political will, and in order to prevent – as you say – anything like this happening, not through good intentions but through facts, I would like to ask you whether the French Presidency, before it ends, would be willing to make, in the way it considers appropriate, some kind of recommendation which would dispel these concerns, that is to say, which would ensure that Mediterranean production would in no way pay the price for enlargement.

Political group: PSE