GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, Commissioner Barnier, ladies and gentlemen, I, too, should like to start by congratulating the two rapporteurs, Mr Méndez de Vigo and Mr Leinen, for their sterling work and the manner in which they have conducted themselves, for want of a better word, from start to finish in order to include as many ideas and views of the Members of the European Parliament in their reports as possible. Obviously, there are as many excellent and interesting ideas, visions and proposals for the future of Europe as there are responses to the challenges facing the European Union. However, not one idea, vision or proposal can be implemented or can bring in results unless the right method is used to put flesh on the bones of these visions and proposals. And the right method is none other than a convention, a body which needs to reflect accurately all the current political forces in Europe. The work of this convention, which we believe should be the subject of the fullest democratic dialogue, should result in a proposal which is a synthesis and product of all the views formulated at it. Only thus will the foundations on which the Europe of the future is built be more representative, more democratic and, hence, more efficient, not to mention permanent and equitable.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this motion celebrates the good news, the successful ending of the Sharm el-Sheikh negotiations and the agreement of safe passage for Palestinian goods, vehicles and people. But the safe passage is physically just a narrow corridor through which freedom of movement, a central tenet of European Union philosophy, is hedged about with many necessary security constrictions. May these soon ease as confidence builds up. Free trade also needs fair pricing in order for the producer and the seller to make due profit, as well as honest labelling of product origins and processes to satisfy the customers’ requirements on health and choice. Both these key free trade elements have been absent in part or in whole from Palestinian export trade, particularly in textiles and in agricultural products. Conflict has dominated the trade agenda too. This motion calls for an end to all trade obstructions. Only then can three close neighbours – Israel, Palestine and Jordan – build real prosperity for all their peoples. Yes, there are risks involved, but what a prize to win. I commend this motion to Parliament.

Political group: ELDR
I should like to thank Mrs Maij-Weggen, who congratulated us on the fact that the Social-Democrats in the Netherlands are certainly helping our country out of an awkward situation today by not raising any obstacles with regard to Copenhagen or the European Council which is to be held within the next couple of days. It is important for both the and the Social-Democrats, who are in opposition in the Netherlands, to help the Netherlands move in the right direction. We are pleased that the European Union is still on schedule concerning enlargement. Given the years of preparation and the importance of enlargement, we hope that we can complete the process with all ten candidate countries within the next eighteen months. The frank Commission reports, for which my congratulations, confirm that a few things still need to be resolved. The European Parliament has also pointed out the weaknesses on several occasions. Most candidate countries are still lacking in areas such as implementation capacity and the fight against corruption. The further agreements concluded between the Commission and the acceding countries will therefore need to play an important role in the European Parliament's final assessment. It is too early to rest on our laurels, but at the same time, the European Union must remain reasonable. We cannot ask more from the candidates than what we can accomplish ourselves. All this also applies to Slovakia. Until 1998, Slovakia lagged behind the other countries, but has since then largely made up the difference – in fact to such an extent that it now has every right, in my view, to feature on the Commission's list. The rate at which reforms have taken place over the past few years gives me hope that the remaining problems can be resolved quickly. ‘Keep at it!’ is the message we should like to pass on to the new Slovakian Government. Fortunately, it was set up promptly after the elections in September and, like the previous government, will be able to work well with the European Union. I should like to urge this House, but also mainly the Council, to put the Meciar era behind us. It is over, and it is unfair to keep reminding Slovakia of it.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Madam Vice-President, thank you for giving us this interim report now. We are dissatisfied with the Member States, which have practically left you in the lurch over the last eighteen months. The interim report on trans-European transport networks has been overdue since 1999. We thank you for presenting it now. So, to our first question: in your report, you make it clear that you want to add new elements, but that you also want to insist on existing projects which the Member States are still working on – such as the Brenner Tunnel – now at last being finished. I would therefore ask you how we are together to ensure, even with a possible change to the financial arrangements, that older projects as important as the Brenner Tunnel, but also new ones such as the Franco-Spanish link across the Pyrenees, or the fixed Femarn Belt link between Denmark and Germany actually get built? Madam Vice-President, you have already alluded to my second question: when are you going to expound to us in committee or in this House what your policy will be on combating new competition in the form of subsidised air travel? Alternatively, the question arises of how the airlines can be helped after the tragic events of 11 September.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am afraid I cannot agree with Mr Corbett's point about the votes in this plenary. There are many committees in this Parliament, which do not have representation from every Member State. Therefore we will find those people will be disenfranchised and that is becoming a greater problem as the European Union enlarges. We must have the opportunity for members from every Member State to be able to vote on these reports and on these important amendments.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am a great supporter of genuine human rights, but there is a danger that we are moving to an increasingly rights-based culture and that just about every human desire and social and health need is defined as a fundamental human right. This approach is unhelpful from many standpoints, not least from the point of view of those who suffer genuine human rights abuse and whose cry is muffled by all the other competing demands. I have another concern: at a time when international terrorism ranks among our greatest anxieties, we all too often see terrorists and their front organisations and political apologists abuse the human rights label for their own purposes as a political weapon and as a means of reducing the effectiveness of the security forces operating against them. The report before us contains all of these faults. It is a great improvement on the first draft, but still lacks sufficient focus on the real human rights concerns around the world. Whilst swiping at the current targets of the left - the United States and Israel - it misses the opportunity to expose those corrupt regimes on many continents that keep their people in misery, and offers very little support to the victims of terrorism or those engaged in fighting terrorism. In regard to the Israel-Palestine question, paragraph 46 of the report infers that settlement activity outside Israel's borders is somehow comparable to indiscriminate terrorist attacks on innocent civilians inside Israel. Such comparisons are nothing short of abhorrent and it is most irresponsible for politicians to make such suggestions, particularly when all our peoples are faced with the threat of terrorism. In regard to the issue of Guantanamo Bay, the report offers excessive comfort to those detained in Camp Delta, while ignoring the difficulties faced by our democracies in dealing with fanatics who are intent on menacing and murdering innocent civilians. I would like to see a call for tough action by the EU and the rest of the international community to bring about real change in the countries that are the real human rights abusers, like Zimbabwe. Let us focus on real human rights problems, not political whim.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, our group supports the work carried out, thus far, by Mr Van Dam and the Council, together. We feel that this recommendation is a major step forwards, particularly in the field of maritime safety, especially since the statistics of past years are extremely alarming: in the last 10 years, between 1990 and 1999, we recorded the sinking of 146 bulk carriers and the deaths of 780 crew members, all of which occurred during the loading or unloading of these carriers. The Commission’s directive harmonises, at last, a field of legislation which has allowed too many, too dangerous exceptions in the past. We are going to harmonise the loading and unloading procedures, the safety standards inside and outside terminals and the levels of responsibility on board vessels and ashore. I welcome the fact that all this has served to improve quality, first and foremost; we feel that quality must be an essential, basic condition if safety standards are to be satisfactory. I welcome the fact that a balance was found quickly between Parliament and the Council’s positions, a balance which, moreover, respects the spirit of the amendments proposed and adopted by Parliament as well. At last, as of today, we are on the way to more stringent legislation, to a code of procedure which has the merit of courageously placing safety above all other concerns, including economic and financial concerns. That is why we are totally satisfied with the final version of this report.

Political group: PSE
The European Parliament must speak out clearly against war as a means of disarming Iraq, because the vast majority of our citizens is against it. The UN has shown the way: by forcing disarmament through inspections and demanding answers to the inspectors’ questions. All further action must take place within the framework of the UN. Human rights remain a dead letter in other countries as well; other countries also have weapons of mass destruction – Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and India for example. It is inconceivable that a superpower would be able to unilaterally solve the problem by military means. The fact that Iraq has been weakened by the Gulf War ten years ago and has oil wells does not justify making an exception to this. There are many other problems waiting to be resolved, such as the Palestine issue, the Middle East, Kashmir and so on. It is not only the Kurds in Iraq who are waiting for recognition of their rights as a people, but also those in Syria, Turkey and Iran. The pressure on Saddam must be maintained until the regime falls or conforms with the international rule of law. Arming a dictator, as the Russians and the Americans but also the British, French and Germans did with Saddam during his war with Iran, is costly in the long term. The road to a durable peace must be coupled with disarmament and development. The oil in Iraq changes nothing.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, it was said earlier this evening in this House that it is now a question of having to devise rules that remove the risks of corruption, nepotism and the abuse of power. It is therefore important that we bring about the simplification intended in the Commission’s proposal. I am afraid, however, that we may be in danger of failing in our task of ensuring that this is what happens, because the majority of the committee have voted in favour of a lot of restrictions that may cost European taxpayers dearly. The Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party believes that there are no reasons for raising the threshold values. As has been said on a number of occasions, it would contravene our international obligations. Nor are we convinced by the argument for raising the threshold values on the grounds that there are now so few cross-border tenders. On the contrary, we may find ourselves with more cross-border procurement as a result of simplifying the directive, applying the simplified procedure and having a larger number of electronic tenders. The Group is concerned that Parliament’s amendments, for example Amendment No 20, might reduce transparency on the subject of procurement in most Member States. It is important, once a contract has been concluded, for competitors to be able to check that the procedure is being carried out correctly. Amendment No 24 must therefore be rejected. The eagerness with which the other political groups have endorsed Amendment No 20, aimed at increasing secrecy, sometimes leads me to wonder whether we are all aware of what we have decided when it comes to access to EU documents. The Group, which is otherwise fairly satisfied with the common position, is, however, anxious that the Council’s position would be less effective than current legal practice in providing opportunities for taking account of environmental aspects. In our view, a procuring authority should be able to go beyond its brief, as narrowly conceived, and take account both of the value to the environment of what is being purchased and of the method by which it is produced. We have therefore again tabled an amendment to Article 53 that, at first reading, was supported by almost the whole of the Chamber. We also wish to reject those amendments by the committee that would shape the directive in such a way as to impede the reorganisation and modernisation of public administration. We are also unhappy about the restrictions that the majority of Parliament have wanted to see imposed upon electronic tenders, involving even stricter regulations than those laid down in the electronic signatures directive. I am amazed at my fellow MEPs’ distrust of electronic signatures, but confidence in fax messages, which often lead to information leaking out. The Group wants us, then, to make efforts in the direction of simplification and modernisation. We therefore hope that we shall vote wisely on these matters.

Political group: ELDR
The Burmese generals are really doing everything they can to remain in power. Opponents are being silenced. The opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has spent half of the past 14 years under house arrest. She has now been arrested again, allegedly for her own safety. The junta is completely paranoid and controls the administration, justice, the economy and the private lives of the Burmese people. There is absolutely no democracy whatsoever, and the people are being kept ignorant. Anyone who has had an education is distrusted. Every time there is a student demonstration the government closes the university. The country has been in crisis for the past 14 years, and there is a shortage of everything except corruption, which is flourishing. The regime practices systematic discrimination against the Rohingya people. There is absolutely no sign of any rapprochement between the government and the opposition. In order to pull the wool over the eyes of the West, cosmetic steps are taken every now and again, such as the visit of the UN envoy Razali. Burma has one of the most corrupt regimes in the world. The international community has tolerated this for much too long. The more than 1 000 political prisoners must be released immediately, and all repressive measures must be rescinded. The European Union must make Burma an important point on the agenda of the ASEAN conference in Bali. As long as pressure from neighbouring countries remains minimal, the generals will be in no hurry to pack their bags. The European Union must also further intensify its sanctions policy. We must put a complete stop to business contact, which also means no investment. There is a risk that the resoluteness of the generals will result in a feeling that there is actually nothing we can do, but we owe it to the patient and extremely tenacious Aung San Suu Kyi and the poor population of Burma to do everything we can to drive the generals from power.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, in accordance with the Commission’s comments, I would like to table an oral amendment to Amendment No 17 saying the same thing, but in a different place. So instead of being at the end of the recital, the paragraph proposed in Amendment No 17 would be after “other professional activity”, so that the amendment would read: “This Directive should not be applied to persons who conduct another professional activity, for example, a tax expert or accountant who advises on insurance incidentally as part of that other professional activity', and here the paragraph proposed in the Amendment would be included, 'or to those simply providing general information on insurance products”. The rest of the recital would remain as it was drawn up in the common position. (The President declared the common position approved as amended) *** Report (A5-0182/2002) by Mr José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council decision on adopting a Community programme to improve the operation of taxation systems in the internal market (Fiscalis 2007 programme) [COM(2002) 10 – C5-0027/2002 – 2002/0015(COD)] (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0209/2002) by Mr Konstantinos Alyssandrakis, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, on the proposal and on the amended proposal for a Council decision adopting a specific programme 2002-2006 (Euratom) for research and training on nuclear energy [COM(2001) 279 – C5-0333/2001 + COM(2002) 43 – C5- 0215/ 2002 – 2001/0125(CNS)] Before the vote:

Political group: PSE
Thank you, Mr President. In fact I would just like clarification on something. I am very pleased that we will be voting on this issue this week, because it is clear that information is already being passed on to the United States. We therefore urgently need this week to call a halt to this. I am not clear as to who is responsible here, however. Is it true that the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs is getting down to it this evening? I would welcome that very much, but in that case we would need to draw up a resolution this evening that would have to be put to the vote on Wednesday. I would definitely welcome that. The most important thing is to arrive at a resolution this week, and the second most important thing is to leave it in the hands of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. If we are unable to do so this evening, I would like to have an urgent additional meeting tomorrow to ensure that the specialist committee retains control of this matter.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, those of us who survived the conciliation procedure for the water framework directive must be delighted that here we have an issue which is entirely clear-cut and easily understandable. The first issue is that we want equal and effective enforcement of environmental legislation across the European Union and we must all agree to that principle. The question obviously is why we have not had that before. Why have the Commissioner's predecessors not brought forward proposals before now and why are the proposals now introduced so miserably weak? There is also a question for Member States. What have they been doing signing up to environmental legislation if in reality they do not have the means to check properly that it has been carried out and have no intention of ensuring that it is properly enforced? I have chemical companies in my constituency in the north-west of England. Some of them, I am sorry to say, discharge polluting materials into air and water. They get inspected. Action is taken. They are forced to clean up their act. They pay the price for that. But they are competing with chemical companies elsewhere in this European Union which are not having to carry out those checks, which are not having to pay the price and they are not able to compete therefore on a level playing field. It is simply unfair. The second issue is the clear conflict here between the Parliament and the Council. Any student who wants to understand conciliation procedure or codecision procedure has a nice straightforward case study here. We have codecision powers but we have the threat from the Council that if we do not fall into line then they will abandon the whole legislation. Well, they might as well, as Mrs Jackson has said. The message for the French Presidency is that we want tangible progress. We do not want to see this abandoned. There is room for compromise, presumably over the implementation date. All the institutions in the European Union want the laws enforced properly. It is time to give these warm but rather woolly sentiments some real meaning and action.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, I am taking the floor to request that Parliament express its opinion in accordance with Rule 7(4) of the Rules of Procedure. If you will allow me, I will justify my proposal.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I agree wholeheartedly with what Mr Posselt and Mrs Flesch have said about this unfortunate vote on cancelling Friday sittings here in Strasbourg. I take the view that this violates the Treaty and violates the agreement on where Parliament sits. I am really pleased that the ministers in the Council of Ministers and not Parliament continue to decide where Parliament sits and I hope that the Intergovernmental Conference will not change that. It is hard to understand why we are passing a resolution on a four-day working week when the Treaty refers to session weeks. Every employee in the Community, hundreds of millions of people, work a five-day week. Once we have a four-day week for everyone else, because the self-employed already work whenever they want, then we can also say that a session week is only four days long. I think it is a disgrace, it is a waste of money and as for the ridiculous ... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: PPE-DE
Regarding the proposal for a Council regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops to include flax and hemp grown for fibre, we would state the following. As liberals, we believe that agricultural policy should be adjusted to the market and de-bureaucratised. If Parliament is serious about eastward enlargement, there must be a drive extensively to cut back on the costs of agriculture. All direct forms of support for agricultural production ought gradually to be abolished. - Bösch report (A5-0116/2000)

Political group: ELDR