GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I would like to congratulate Commissioner Bolkestein warmly on the initiative he has shown, the energy he has displayed and the success he has achieved in respect of the European Community patent. I would like to ask him four questions. As I understand it, some Commissioners, as well as people other than Commissioners, have problems with the proposed language system. I am not fanatical about languages, but I do wonder why there should be three languages and not five, as is the case in the Community Trademark Office. Would this cause a real problem? Secondly, the decision to convert the office in Munich into an EU agency has to be approved unanimously by fifteen governments. Is that a problem? Thirdly, on the position of the European Parliament, we do not really have much of a say. Does this mean that the European Parliament, which has worked harder than anyone else to achieve a European Community patent, will not be involved, or at least be updated in good time and on a regular basis? Finally, what is the latest on the future expansion of the Community patent?

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the calling of municipal elections by President Obiang should constitute a step forward on the path to democratisation in that country and, therefore, we should take a positive of view of it. Even more so if we bear in mind that the President of Guinea is one of the signatories of the Cairo declaration and the action plan which accompanies it, which recognises the need to consolidate democratic principles, based on the right of all citizens to choose their leaders freely by means of free elections and, consequently, also the need to ensure that elections are transparent and free, and to adopt the necessary means for their effective observation. However, the experience of previous elections, during which serious irregularities and a total lack of transparency were noted, as well the continuing lack of democratic guarantees in Guinea, requires not only that we observe very carefully how the coming elections are held, but also that we demand, forcefully, that President Obiang adopts the necessary measures to guarantee fair play in these elections. We especially have to ensure that the process is open to all political forces – which involves the liberation of the political prisoners – and that the opposition is guaranteed the full expression of its democratic freedoms. We should also demand the presence of observers who can monitor, in total freedom, the handling of these elections, and verify that democratic rights have been respected. These elections may offer Guinea the opportunity to start along the path to democracy. They could also lead to a rapprochement with the European Union and the granting of the aid which the European Union was prepared to give in the event that democracy was respected. Therefore, as a Parliament, we have the obligation to exert pressure on President Obiang and demand that he allows these elections to be held in accordance with democratic principles. This is the only way that freedom may be fully restored to the people of Guinea. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I feel that, as Mr Berenguer Fuster said, the Commission proposal fills a large gap in the internal insurance market which has been created by the huge development in insurance and reinsurance transactions recently, particularly relating to the insurance of specific interests, and here I refer to the major industrial and commercial risks, while the market for private individuals and other smaller risks has been left rather to its own devices, resulting in a sort of free-for-all. We know how sensitive insurance mediation is, and our directive concerns precisely the mediation aspect. That is why we found the Commission’s proposal both balanced and interesting, although possibly a little overcomplicated, which is why we have endeavoured to streamline it with a series of amendments – I am, of course speaking on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, which has drafted its opinion – to make the sector which does not focus primarily on insurance rather more mobile and marketable. There are, in fact, many entities, such as travel and tour agencies, whose main activity is not insurance but which do sell risk and life insurance as part of their business. Such transactions clearly lie outside and are not bound by the usual conventions of professionalism and honour, by the extremely stringent and far-reaching requirements, that is, which guarantee precisely that good faith and reliability and credibility that should be high priority in insurance.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this is an important debate for it is the first time we have come to discuss the European Central Bank’s report. The fact that President Duisenberg is present serves to underline the special relationship that the ECB has with our Parliament. The Liberals are satisfied with the ECB’s report and with the four proposals put forward by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for there to be more transparency in the bank’s dealings. But we are disappointed that the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has shown itself unwilling to take one step more towards achieving still greater openness, hence my group has submitted a number of amendments to this end. I refer in particular to the publication of votes and the voting behaviour of each individual member of the Governing Council. We believe that this could only strengthen, not weaken the independence of the members. After all, the ex officio attendance of the Council of Ministers and the European Commission means that the national governments too are now in a position to know how the members vote and are able to bring pressure to bear at will, but then this is done completely unverifiably and behind closed doors. We do not doubt the integrity of the members of the Governing Council and openness is, we think, the best way in which to guarantee greater integrity. We have no time for the argument that members could not then change their minds. Of course they can if, for example, circumstances changed or new arguments were put forward. It may well be that their voting behaviour would initiate debate, but we are sufficiently reassured that the members of the Council have the fortitude to deal with this. Greater openness is a sign of strength and inspires confidence. We consider this to weigh more heavily than any possible risks. What is more, publication would bring the Bank more into line with the Federal Reserve Bank in the United States and the Bank of Japan. Why should we Europeans act as if we have something to hide? Surely that is only going to weaken confidence in the euro? Mr President, as liberals we are very much in favour of the ECB’s being independent and we value the part the President has to play in upholding this. But we believe that greater openness would reinforce the independence and authority of the ECB and request that Parliament supports moves to this end.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, if I understood you correctly, the Spanish Constitutional Court has confirmed your opinion, and ruled that requests for the lifting of immunity, even from the Spanish Supreme Court, must be addressed to you through the Spanish government. There was some controversy over whether the stance you took was necessarily correct. In the light of the situation, I should like to address a further question to Mrs Sauquillio: Do you know whether the dossiers are already on their way here? Have you been informed that the dossier is being sent to you again? Yes or no? Secondly, did I also understand you correctly as saying that you intend asking the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs to deal with the matter as soon as the documents arrive? Will you be doing that directly, or will you be informing Parliament first? On the basis of what you yourself have said, you ought first to inform Parliament when you have received the file, and only then could you involve the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. That would mean that we could not expect the matter to come before the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs until after the next plenary session. That is why I am asking you quite specifically: will you be passing the files to the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs as soon as you receive the dossier irrespective of the plenary session, I mean the files on the presumed suspect Mr Berlusconi and the file on the presumed suspect Mr Dell’Utri? There are, after all, two cases here.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, like many British Members, I live in two worlds. One is the place that I read about in our national newspapers. Some of them, at least, feed their readers a diet of lies and half-truths to whip up hatred of all things European. And the other is here; the place which actually exists, where I find myself working amongst colleagues and others trying to make this continent a better place for its citizens. This draft directive belongs to the second of these two worlds. Its simple aim is to cut pollution and improve the air we breathe, which circulates from one country to another without respect to national boundaries. Who can be against that? The public information insisted upon in the draft directive is vital and gives the opportunity to back up legal measures with the right of the public to name and shame those governments which fail to take the necessary measures to comply with this directive. And, if we fail to achieve the targets for reducing benzene and carbon monoxide emissions, it will not be the fault of industry. They have done their part through technological change. It will be the fault of governments for not having the political courage to curb the use of cars in our cities. The Liberal Democrats welcome this measure. I anticipate us supporting all the amendments which have been tabled. We are pleased to be sending a strong and practical message to eurosceptics everywhere that we are in Europe to make this continent a better place for us all.

Political group: ELDR
The Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party voted for this report without any enthusiasm. It concerns principally the marketing in the Union of two new sweeteners, sucralose and salt of aspartame-acesulfame, two substances whose contribution to health, in particular the health of diabetics and the obese, should be emphasised. The regrets the adoption, by one vote, of Amendment No 4, which calls for a reassessment of the authorisation of aspartame and improved, specific labelling for products containing this sweetener. This was contrary to the opinions given by the European Scientific Committee on Food, an entirely independent body, and several national bodies, which confirmed the harmlessness of aspartame. The Group, which is in favour of natural law, has thus been emulated by the s in passing on the rumours circulating on the Internet with regard to the risk posed by this substance. I would add that sweeteners (which are also found in sweets and chewing-gum) are not harmful to teeth. And therein – as confirmed by every European dentist – lies the real revolution in relation to traditional sugar, which plays havoc with our children’s teeth. Having said that, before discussing this matter, we must be aware that the real problem posed by sweeteners is not their alleged toxicity but the risk of nurturing this taste for sugar, which is a true sign of our times. - Report Nobilia (A5-0105/2003)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the death of Laurent-Désiré Kabila has opened new perspectives for peace. The fact is that the former president had become an obstacle to the implementation of the Lusaka peace agreement. He was eliminated by the very people who helped bring him to power. His successor and son, Joseph Kabila, can count for the time being on a great deal of credit from the international community. All the same, he is the main character in a script written and directed by others, by Angola and Zimbabwe, but also by the hardliners from his father’s government. It looks very much as if there has been a change of driver, but that the bus remains the same. The young Kabila has awakened high expectations. The time has now come for him to act. As of now the Lusaka agreement is the only framework for a permanent solution. Specifically, withdrawal of all foreign troops from Congolese territory and the simultaneous initiation of inter-Congolese dialogue. The international community must quickly decide on its attitude and particularly push for the deployment of MONUC of the UN peacekeeping forces. There is also an urgent need for more coherent action, both between Europe and America and between the various Member States. Certain Member States continue to approach the conflict in the Great Lakes region on the basis of an imagined, artificial conflict between English-speakers and French-speakers. Others mainly try to secure their own economic interests. There are limits to cynicism. If the window of opportunity is not quickly used to force a real breakthrough in the peace process, violence will soon flare up again and the first African world war will further escalate. I urge the Council and also the Commission to take a more assertive stance, because only if Europe speaks with one voice can it make a meaningful contribution to ending a war which has already cost too many lives.

Political group: PPE-DE
The Heads of Government have failed. We in this European Parliament now demand that the Irish Presidency should, in January 2004, present a concrete plan of action to complete the Constitution before May 2004. I should like to say at this stage that if that does not happen, further enlargement over and above the Ten is out of the question until a Constitution is in place. Financial perspectives will be examined extremely sceptically and legislation (after first reading) will meet with strong protest. This House does not want ‘business as usual’, even if we have to call on the Convention, the national parliaments and the European Parliament to help each other in taking action. I would therefore urge the public to support ‘their’ Constitution and bring pressure to bear on their governments. Report: Renate Sommer (A5-0435/2003)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to start by thanking the rapporteur, Mrs Sbarbati, for, as I have already said in committee, she has produced such a perfect report that even I would not have been able to improve on it. I therefore congratulate her, as do all the pensioners and elderly people to whom I owe seat no 274 in this Chamber! I would like to draw your attention to paragraph 18 of the report, which calls upon 'the Member States to undertake the task of caring for older people who are in hospital and unable to look after themselves, or to reimburse the expenses of doing so to families who help them'. This amendment was tabled by myself, Carlo Fatuzzo, and accepted by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. I would stress the importance of this paragraph. In many of our Member States – in Italy, certainly, and, I am sure, in the United Kingdom, Greece and other States – we work extremely hard: we work from morning to night, getting up at six o'clock in the morning and returning home, tired, worn out, at eight or nine o'clock at night. The years go by: our work causes us to fall ill, we pay pension contributions and national insurance contributions; we pay rates and taxes. It is a common occurrence, in the latter years of life, for a worker to become very seriously ill, often a total invalid, needing assistance from everybody. And the State provides no financial assistance at all, not even for those who have no property and no income. And the worker, who has given everything to society, has to sell his house to pay for healthcare, to use up all his money and to see his family reduced to scrimping and saving, at the very moment when one would expect the State and other people to be supportive, during the last years of one's life, when everything looks black and the only ray of light is the help of one's neighbour. Let us therefore give hope to the elderly citizens throughout Europe by voting for this report, including paragraph 18. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, because I learned something from her report, which is always very pleasant. In addition the report points out the necessary modification of the guidelines. Of course we must bring swine fever under control, but extermination methods that require mass slaughter are no longer really accepted by public opinion. That is a problem. I myself come from Flanders. It is a densely populated region and there are even more pigs than people. That means that we ourselves are dramatically confronted with that problem. Therefore I agree that the combating of swine fever is important but should like at the same time to point out that this animal disease, unlike others, presents no danger to human beings. I would say that culling because of the disease is one thing, but it is difficult to distinguish from culling for economic reasons, for example because sties become overfull or because animals become too heavy for sale. That is why it is always rather hypocritical when mass slaughter is being considered, since it is not very clear whether the culling is taking place to prevent disease or for economic reasons. I must honestly admit that in that respect I do not trust the industry. The report has nevertheless convinced me that there has been a remarkable development in marker vaccine. Therefore in my view it can easily be declared ready for use so that it could be used on a much wider scale than solely in emergencies. If it is not reliable, for example because the disease can still be transmitted via the placenta, then it would seem sensible to me that it cannot be used with sows but that it can still be of use in other cases. If it transpires, as is argued in the report, that the diagnostic method is still not reliable, then I believe that we must do our utmost to develop good diagnostic methods, so that a distinction can be made between vaccinated animals on the one hand and animals that have developed antibodies because they have had the disease or have had contact with the disease in some other way. This is why I believe that culling must be rejected as a method of combating this animal disease and that we must concentrate our attention on the development not only of marker vaccine, since that already exists – but of good diagnostic methods and the refinement of the vaccine so that it can also be used for sows. In any case the guidelines should provide regulation that makes mass culls unnecessary. I agree with the conclusions of the Commission, namely that mass culls cast a slur on the agricultural policy and the health policy that we wish to pursue as a European Community.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would like to thank Mrs Hautala very sincerely for the enormous amount of work that we have achieved together here. This proposal became necessary because appeals had been made to the European Court of Justice in over 40 cases. The most prominent cases, which we in the European Parliament have also been very much involved in, a point I would like to reiterate, were the Kalanke and Marshall cases. These cases have important ramifications not only in Germany, but have also led to a degree of legal uncertainty throughout the Union. The anti-discrimination provisions of Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam and Articles 141 and 3 give us a clear legal basis for amending this directive now so as to improve the position of women. Many of the extensive amendments at first reading are reflected in the common position. That is our first achievement. Direct and indirect discrimination, sexual harassment in the workplace, positive action – these are now all covered by the common position. Nevertheless, we are now going a step further. We want to protect not only mothers but also fathers, something that, as is reflected here, originally met with some resistance in this House. But that is what we expect. I think that we now need to find some clearer wording. In the course of various extended working sessions, we have managed to achieve a broad consensus in this Parliament on 15 compromise proposals. I accordingly wish to recommend that my group should stick to this compromise. Our objective remains that of rapidly improving the position of both men and women who are committed to their family, and working towards reconciling professional and family commitments. We want to create a clear legal framework. That is why if it proves necessary we want to initiate the conciliation procedure as quickly as possible. We hope that the compromise before us here will hold up and that the Commission and the Council will accordingly also display a willingness to agree, for the benefit of women.

Political group: PSE
I voted for 'Opt Out'. The opposite, an 'Opt-In' regime for Europe, would be entirely ineffective. If the EU legislates to try to restrict the sending of emails, whether for marketing, or fundraising, or political messages, the emails will still be sent to receivers within the EU – but from outside the EU. Indeed, I am tempted by the thought of setting up a little business in somewhere sunny like a Carribean island from where I would spray unlimited emails into the EU from EU businesses in return for a nice fat fee. This business could not exist in the EU. The well-meaning EU, if it chooses 'Opt In', will do two harmful things : it will handicap EU-based businesses against their worldwide competitors, and it will transfer jobs outside the EU. The road to hell, they say, is paved with good intentions. 'Spam' needs to be controlled – but it can only be controlled by global legislation and cooperation.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, I would like first of all to thank Mrs Echerer most sincerely for the good teamwork and the expertise that characterises it. This report is the latest reason why I will not be the only one to be sorry that you, Mrs Echerer, will not be standing for this Parliament again. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has adopted my opinion unanimously and because of the good teamwork is also able to vote in favour of the Echerer report. In drafting this opinion for the forthcoming debate, including that with the Commission, I and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs were concerned primarily with five particular points. Firstly, monopolies must always be exceptions to competition law and there must be sound reasons for them. We know that collecting societies are organised differently in the various Member States and in many they have a monopoly over particular categories of works. There is therefore a definite need to look more closely at, or review, the territorial monopoly structures, but not to reject them outright. Secondly, it is in our opinion important to have transparency in collecting societies, such as showing administrative and licence costs separately in the accounts. Something needs to be done here. Thirdly – and this is related to the second point – there is in many countries no supervision of collecting societies. I therefore expressly welcome paragraph 49 of the Echerer Report with its call for efficient independent control mechanisms in all Member States. Fourthly, my suggestion for a public register that could be accessed electronically, containing all right-holders represented by collecting societies, would make for greater clarity and improved transparency and would certainly also simplify cross-border activity and increase competition. Fifthly and finally, where the fragmentation of rights gives rise to high transaction costs, the introduction of a one-stop shop system could be a more efficient and cheaper way for users and exploiters of rights. I ask the Commission to take the contents of the Echerer report on board in its deliberations. Once again my sincere congratulations and I ask you to vote in favour of this report.

Political group: PPE-DE