GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
The report by Mrs Roberta Angelilli is an improvement on the Commission's Green Paper on a legislative framework for compensating victims of crime. The basic idea put forward in the report, that all Member States should establish compensation schemes for victims of crime who cannot obtain compensation from the offenders responsible for the crime or through any means, including victims of terrorism, is a good one, because the European Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes, which has applied since 1988, has not been signed by all the Member States and, even where it has, it does not allow the victims of violent crimes to apply for state compensation. The directive on best practices in the various Member States, which the Commission is also called on to introduce, is a good move and will help less-experienced Member States deal with these issues.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, let me begin by congratulating Mr Corrie on his excellent and comprehensive report. Our approach to development policy must always be based on respect for human rights and the fight against poverty. But there is a crass contradiction between fighting poverty and the cuts in development aid appropriations in many Member States and in the EU. With regard to financing, we must look to the future and provide the Joint Assembly with additional funds so that, for instance, we can send delegations to the ACP states to oversee electoral processes, at their invitation. In future, the EU must take a far more multilateral approach when it agrees development projects and, furthermore, must coordinate more closely with the individual states in order to improve efficiency and use the funding more effectively. An example here could be the field of education, which will deserve and need special support in the ACP states in future. For instance, the very rapidly growing educational and technological potential of the Internet offers entirely new means of helping the developing countries, which at present still have modest resources, to move towards a global approach, as opposed to globalisation. I see it as a future task of the EU to contribute in this way to the establishment of small and medium-sized enterprises in the ACP states, which can promote self-help. An example here is the problem in Nigeria, which imports industrial finished products from all over the world and then has to spend substantial resources on product maintenance by foreign workers. One way forward to promote the setting up of SMEs could be to train the Nigerian population adequately. It will be easier to take account of the developing countries’ very diverse problems, and EU aid could be prepared and implemented in a more targeted manner if, as the report makes quite clear, we take the urgently needed step of optimising our working methods, by introducing the proposed regional assemblies.

Political group: PPE-DE
The mistake proposed by this Parliament was made very clear to me at the meeting on the 16th, with Commissioner Wallström and yourself. Before moving on to the specific subject of Mr Ferrández’s question and your reply, I will say that I am from Valencia, on the banks of the Júcar River, which today is dying as a result of there not having been a rigorous environmental impact study. We all know that work of this magnitude is irreversible once it is built. Therefore, the socio-economic effects and the destruction and deterioration of the environment would be less harmful if today this Parliament were to send a note to the Spanish Government telling it to suspend the project as a precaution until it is examined by this Parliament.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I wish to thank the Danish Presidency, which has guided the process from Copenhagen to Copenhagen not as a national, but as a European goal. The Danish Presidency has demonstrated clearly that it is Europe’s servant, and that it is not pursuing specifically Danish goals. It is the European goal which is being pursued, and, as usual, it is the small, eager, competent countries which are pursuing it. No new conditions for enlargement should be imposed. It has been said time and time again, and our political group obviously shares this view of the matter. No new conditions. It is clear that a debate on agricultural and funding reform will follow, but, as so many have said here in the House, these must not get in the way of enlargement. This is something that must be solved in stages. We have been discussing the provision of information to our citizens on enlargement. Is it, however, the Commission which is going to do that? In my opinion, it is all very well for the Commission to supply factual information, but in actual fact it is us, the politicians – our governments and the parties in our countries – who have to solve the problem of information. I think we have to realise this, because different countries see things in different ways. Some things are more important in the north, other things in the south, but the common thread must be that we are carrying out enlargement because we wish to have peace in our territory; peace for when our children and children’s children grow up. It is a very simple message, and I think that it is the pivotal element in this connection. Many issues have been raised along the way, and one which is raised in at least some of the countries is the question of whether widespread corruption exists, which will undermine the fair distribution of EU subsidies. It is not an insurmountable obstacle, however. We must of course invite the applicant countries to participate in the existing system of subsidies on an equal footing with the present members. We should have faith in the applicant countries’ governments, too, being minded to do their best to prevent the misuse of common funds. They are equal members, but if it should be established that there is any corruption or fraud involving EU funds, the Commission should, in a transitional period, step in and take over the administration of subsidies, so that the money is paid out to those for whom it is intended. We wish for many things, including that the democracy which we are developing, and which is developing all the time, be strengthened by the accession of the new countries. They bring with them a wide range of highly educated, extremely interesting people, who will enrich immeasurably the territory we are shaping together, and it is precisely their contribution to the creation of a new treaty which is absolutely crucial in ensuring that this takes into account the many cultural and national aspects which should go into building the new Europe.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the droit de suite is an unknown legal right in the United Kingdom and we do not believe it is a beneficial addition to our law. This is because, as has already been pointed out, many artists have recently testified it does not in fact help them. Furthermore, as experience in France shows, the main beneficiaries are the heirs of dead, rich painters, not poor, living ones. At any event, why as a matter of principle should it be right to impose a levy on the sale of a second-hand picture and not to do the same to the maker of a second-hand car or the tailor of a second-hand suit? It is also unnecessary in the single European art market, which for years has worked quite satisfactorily without it, as has already been pointed out this evening. In short, there is no need for harmonisation of this sort in this area. Nevertheless, we in the United Kingdom have, with misgivings and in a spirit of compromise, accepted a formula which includes its eventual introduction in the UK. It is complicated and takes years to come into effect. Cynics might say: a bit like the Treaty of Nice. But London, the centre of the art market in Europe, will disproportionately suffer if much of the trade goes off-shore to Geneva or the United States, unilaterally exporting British jobs with it, unless an international regime is put into place to eliminate global market distortion. If the substance of the compromise is not honoured, we would rather this unnecessary directive did not reach the statute book. If it did so, it would be a great injustice, especially to those whose livelihoods depend upon the art market and, in particular, the art market in London. I can assure the House that, if my party leader William Hague wins the general election, he will match the present Prime Minister's commitment to oppose this proposal in the essential interests of our country. It goes beyond what was agreed in the common position.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, my point was to highlight the problem in relation to the European chocolate industry. The Commissioner spoke in his reply of the help being given to the countries of Africa. However, I read in Le Monde that representatives of the chocolate industry met on 2 May to discuss the question of forced child labour because they are worried about this problem. I think that we should look at the question of ethics and the operating standards of the industry, which is located on European territory and manufactures products based on this unacceptable form of work. Did you follow the debate organised by the International Cocoa Council, the European Cocoa Council, the British trades union in the chocolate industry and the Belgian organisation Caobisco, Commissioner? What are your views on this? What specific measures need to be taken?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the AIEM is a tax that is being talked about a lot this year, both in the Canary Islands and in this House, to the extent that this is the second time we have debated and voted on it. Furthermore, it replaces another no less categorical tax, the APIM. As an outermost region of the European Union, the Canary Islands have seen a review of their model of integration into our European Community, which led to the APIM falling apart when certain basic products or goods were imported, resulting in job losses in the Canary Islands’ industrial sector and a fall in the export of local products. The European Commission, in collaboration with the competent authorities, has therefore put forward a proposal for a decision on special fiscal measures designed to correct the costs of being an outermost region. However, the most important fact from a political viewpoint is, I believe, that the Commission has, to this end, taken Article 299(2) of the Treaty as the legal basis for implementing a temporary and proportional derogation from Articles 23, 25 and 90 when applying the Community provisions that allow the Spanish authorities to discriminate in fiscal terms regarding certain Canary Island products. Hence our congratulations to the Commission, the rapporteur, Mr Marques, and also Mr Casaca for his support. We hope the Council – and Parliament – will be receptive towards this proposal, because amongst other things this tax is recognition of the Canary Islands’ fiscal regime, and it is also coherent with the economic diversification strategy drawn up by the European Union for the outermost regions and prevents job losses.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the situation in the Central African Republic has, once again, just grown worse and several hundred people have been killed in the wake of the attempted coup and the consequent repression. This crisis is, once again, striking a population that has suffered from tribal fighting in a country blighted for decades by a serious economic crisis, as Mr Haarder has just reminded us. This crisis is all the more worrying because it has led to the intervention of foreign armed forces and militias, which is exactly what happened in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It is in danger of plunging the Central African Republic into a similar chaos, which will create even greater suffering. Faced with this tragedy, the European Union cannot turn a blind eye. It does not have to return to a policy of interference, but must simply not give in to the temptation of indifference. The resolution, which is soon to be put to the vote in this House, expresses our compassion and condemns this return to violence. The European Union has the duty to do more, by increasing humanitarian aid, of course, and mainly by closely allying itself with the efforts of the United Nations to establish a climate of reconciliation. I feel that these efforts would be made easier, to a great extent, if a corps of peacekeepers were deployed in the country, similar to the one which played a positive role between 1998 and last February. We have suggested this in our proposal for a resolution, which the Group of the European People’s Party will give their unreserved support.

Political group: PPE-DE
This Council initiative is essential because it is not possible to allow childhood and naivety to be exploited for degrading commercial purposes, in denial of all humane values. It is of the utmost importance to prevent such violations of the rights of individuals and the rights of children and not to confine ourselves to merely reacting. I share the opinion of our rapporteur and the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, that the Council proposal should be made more binding. The definition of offences of child pornography must also be stricter, and I find the definition given by the parliamentary committee perfectly appropriate, ‘the production, sale and distribution or other forms of trafficking in child pornography material and the possession of such material is punishable’ with the proviso that ‘possession shall be punishable only where it is the result of an intentional or deliberate act’. We need all citizens to be involved and to be vigilant, not just police forces through Europol, and public authorities, but also Internet users and the economic network producers, in order to be able to identify the people who use these electronic messages. There is too much at stake for us to fail to call for the mobilisation of the general population against this danger, and that is why I am compelled to vote in favour of this report.

Political group: PSE
Normally the Group would vote against an EC Fisheries Agreement for reasons laid out in the past. However, we have voted for this agreement for the reasons set out below. My report calls for improvements in the fight against illegal fishing in several ways. If EU Member States fishing in Guinea do not provide reliable and detailed data on what they catch, Parliament wants the Commission to begin legal proceedings against them and even to revoke their right to fish under the agreement. Fishing rights for EU vessels must be re-evaluated according to the most recent scientific analyses conducted by the regional fisheries organisation of west Africa. The increase in fishing foreseen in the agreement must also be dependent upon unequivocal and independent scientific justification, which must be made available to the Parliament.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I have just two technical corrections. The first is that recital K speaks of 3.5 million Congolese, a figure about which nobody can be certain, and so we ask that it should speak simply in terms of millions. The other point has to do with paragraph 5. This mentions an agreement as having been signed on 19 May, but it was rightly pointed out in the debate that it was signed on 19 April. We ask that both these points be corrected.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on behalf of our group I just wanted to explain why we voted against the report. The European group of liberals and democrats always felt that the Agency for Reconstruction in Kosovo should be based in Priština and only in Priština and should not, in some way or other, be linked with or part of, or work in tandem with, some other agency in Thessaloniki. We believe that this is the only logical position and it is also the only position that is in the interests of the Kosovars themselves. In view of the fact that the original text from the Commission is very clear in this respect and Mrs Pack’s amendment adding the Thessaloniki aspect is superfluous, our group has opted to vote against the report. What I do want to make clear is that our group does support this Parliament’s position when it comes to improving the efficiency of the agency’s management and the procedures, and of course when it comes to making the agency subject to OLAF’s supervision; indeed how could it be otherwise for I penned these amendments myself. Consequently, we are particularly pleased that the Commission is to adopt many of these amendments. The specific answers that Mr Patten has just given this Parliament are, however, in stark contrast with the overwhelming silence on the part of the Council. The Council has systematically refused to enter into constructive dialogue with this Parliament about the content of the report. We consider this attitude unacceptable and, as far as that is concerned, we are particularly keen to support the position adopted by Mrs Pack, who endeavoured to delay this report up until the very last moment. I would just like to clearly point out – sadly the Council is not present – that Parliament will, of course, have the last word on this matter under the terms of Budget 2000. To sum up, Madam President, as a group we were faced with what was in fact a difficult dilemma in that we had to decide whether to vote for a report that went some of the way towards accommodating our concerns but not on that one essential point, namely Priština. That is why we opted for clarity and consistency at the end of the day and voted against the report. - Palacio Vallelersundi Report (A5-0037/1999)

Political group: ELDR
Mrs Flesch, I should like to congratulate you mainly on the tone of the positive, yet critical, remarks in your explanation. I am finding it a little harder to come to terms with certain euphoric elements that I will highlight in the text itself. As Mrs Kinnock pointed out at great length, the new Rules of Procedure of the ACS-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly have created structures allowing for a real, fruitful dialogue. It appears to me a little premature to herald it as a world model at this stage. There is no doubt that in future, it can become a world model in the field of development cooperation and a place in which people with equal rights can have an open and transparent dialogue, inter alia about democracy and the protection of human rights, thus enabling us to enter into binding agreements with each other. We are not that far yet. There are structures in place and both sides must now make effective use of them. This will require an increase in resources on the ACP side and quite possibly, a change in mentality on both, because the EU partner will also change following the accession of ten new countries. I wonder whether the sound results which we have already achieved in the joint working party, and which are reflected, among others, in the report on child soldiers, can be repeated shortly in our general assembly, where the tone of discussion has picked up a great deal, even though I still sometimes miss the ACP's equal participation. Our forum should develop into an effective North-South Parliament with a real impact on the orientation of our attitudes, for example with regard to world trade. Not only do we want fair trade, we also want free trade. I think that we will have to determine our policy in tandem with the ACP beforehand and that we should not always agree among the rich before we head to a conference in Cancun or wherever. The UN's Millennium Declaration lists major issues in which we would like to make real improvement, for example by halving global poverty and with regard to good governance, health, education and an end to the oppression of women, these should all be items on the agenda, the progress of which we can measure in the framework of the ACP-EU meetings. We must become real partners in the development of North and South, and I should like to emphasise that consultation is necessary at all times if we are to be spared the disastrous effects of such incidents as those in Zimbabwe. IN THE CHAIR: MR DAVID MARTINVice-President

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like first, and on behalf of my group, to thank the rapporteur, Mr Deprez, for the excellent report he has produced on Europol. We talk a very great deal about this topic here in Parliament, and I believe we are agreed that Europol is an important department and one that it is right and proper that the European Union should have. It creates greater security for the public and can help us to contain cross-border forms of crime. To guarantee that, we need good staff, who of course cost money. On that much we can agree. It is therefore somewhat painful for us to have to make clear our present position on the issue of employees' salaries. It really does sadden me that we at present have to resort to sanctions when it comes to officials' salaries. We do not actually want to get into a row with officials, and would much rather deal with the Council, but that is how things are at the moment with Parliament. The question has been put to us, and this is our answer. We demand that structures be set up to facilitate the control of Europol by Parliament. This is something that the Council, in the long term, cannot ignore. To the Council, I say that its conduct in this matter will determine the extent to which the great majority in Parliament will cooperate with it. My group sees the strengthening of Parliament as one of the most important aspects of a future stable Europe. The success of enlargement is also dependent on Europe becoming more parliamentary. This is true in all areas, including internal affairs policy and internal security. We want not only to have co-decision when it comes to money; we want the shaping of internal affairs policy to start with Parliament, and budgetary law is part of that. Let me remind you, in this context, that we have hitherto been highly cooperative. The Council's post-11 September measures have our full support. We gave our full agreement to terrorism being combated without delay. Being convinced that it was right to do so, we also did not hesitate to join in drawing up lists of persons and groups whose assets were to be frozen. We have added essential aspects of counter-terrorism to our agenda, and that has been in cooperation with the Council and the Commission. Having given our full support, we now, though, expect the Council to make its move. We have conceded something in advance. It is now for the Council to meet us halfway. Until that happens, we will support our rapporteur Mr Deprez' proposal that the Belgian and Spanish initiative on Europol be rejected, and will hope that Europol's officials will be able to understand why we do so.

Political group: PSE