GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I think that we all agree that the passenger, by which I mean the person who has planned to travel by aeroplane and who goes to the airport, only to be told that he cannot fly or that his flight is severely delayed, so that his trip makes no sense, should have some basic protection. That is why all of us, from the beginning, focussing on the consumer's interests, said that this view should be supported. On the other hand, we also looked at the interests of the airlines, especially in this critical period which we are going through in the air transport sector and, for this reason, the European Parliament was in favour, from the outset, of balanced measures which, on the one hand, would serve the consumer without, on the other hand, damaging the airlines and their competitiveness. Our rapporteur, Mr Giorgio Lisi, who has done an excellent job, which was ultimately crowned with success during the conciliation procedure, also personally took this line. I personally was in favour, including during the conciliation procedure, and I shall also vote in favour of the result of the agreement with the Council tomorrow, because I think that, without damaging the airlines, it provides a good framework within which to protect the consumer, the passenger. I know that certain airlines continue to have some objections. I have taken them into account, but I do not agree with them. I think they are exaggerating, I think that the agreement we have is a good agreement and that we should accept it as it stands.

Political group: PPE-DE
I have today voted against the European Parliament’s report on a new Statute for Members now that the Commission has issued its opinion following yesterday’s vote in plenary. The proposal was nonetheless approved by 323 votes, with 167 against and 39 abstentions. The new Statute would not lead to increased openness unless, instead of the current system involving flat-rate payments, there were a system for the reimbursement of travel costs whereby it was the actual costs that were reimbursed. Certainly, Parliament’s Praesidium decided on 29 May 2003 to investigate how a new system for the reimbursement of travel costs could be designed, but that does not solve the problem. A decision to refund actual costs should enter into force automatically at the same time as a new Statute for Members is brought into operation. A new Statute for Members must aim at fairness, transparency and efficiency. In the future too, I should ideally like to see the salary level of Members of the European Parliament set in relation to the levels applicable in the national parliaments. Because MEPs live in, and represent, their Member States, tax should, in the future too, be deducted on a national basis so that account might be taken of different countries’ costs of living and social insurance systems.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I sometimes get the feeling that there are those who have, very recently, been blowing the dust of history off the nineteenth-century theory according to which all you have to do is to unchain market forces, (Applause) and then, suddenly, masses of jobs will be created. I see that as utterly false. If we take a close look at where, over the past few decades, there have been the greatest increases in growth and employment, they have occurred precisely in those sectors that Mr Langen listed earlier, namely in sustainable development and in the protection of the environment. I believe that it is also in these that investment has to be more vigorously encouraged, particularly as regards urban renewal, both in relation to its social and environmental components, and also transport. Here too, it appears that it is in relation to the social and environmental components that there is the greatest potential for growth, and so it is here that there are, potentially, the greatest effects on employment. As, I believe, an unregulated market cannot do other than result in adverse consequences for the environment, it naturally follows that investment in these areas would help to secure the ecological bases of our existence. I believe that we have to be faithful to Lisbon and Gothenburg in our approach and in our seeking sustainable production methods in Europe, which will induce growth and employment, founded upon the ecological bases of our existence. We have, in the past, come up with sound approaches to this, and we should continue on this road in a credible way. Internationally, I believe, we will lose our credibility in many areas if we now proceed to dump our own objectives and what we agreed to in Johannesburg and Kyoto. We have to hold fast to our own objectives and carry on down this road.

Political group: PSE
Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of our group, it is with pleasure that I echo the congratulations to the Commissioner and everyone who has been of assistance to him, but one issue is still causing us concern. In various accession countries, there are a number of sectors, and it is often these very areas of policy which require increased efforts. I am, for example, referring to discrimination in the area of social policy and employment, the right to asylum, and justice. Specific problems spring to mind; they are particularly shocking to our EU citizens, and I assume also to the citizens of those countries. I am talking here about such things as the discrimination against the Roma, child prostitution and human trafficking. If these points do not receive priority attention in the sense that they need to be sorted out prior to accession, what means do we have of exerting influence after it? In this connection, I would quote to you your own words: these countries will then have joined and, as you stated in your introduction, you will have very little influence on these new Member States.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, we all agree in acknowledging that, if Europe does not speak with one voice, it is a powerless Europe, but also in this debate, it seems that it is hard for the European Parliament to have one single voice. If we do not want the war to halt the path towards the Constitutional Treaty and towards joint foreign and defence policies, we have to prevent the rift which has divided Europe in recent weeks deepening. We were in agreement in condemning Saddam’s regime; however, we had different opinions on pre-emptive, unilateral war, since mainly innocent victims pay the price for war and since the post-war situation is still completely unclear. But what is the realistic thing to do now? We have to avoid making it more difficult for dialogue between old allies who feel the weight of their responsibility for the world’s future. We must participate in providing humanitarian aid, granting the United Nations the central role of the mandate also in the subsequent stage, in reconstructing Iraq. We must heal the rift between Europeans starting with what unites us. This is the challenge which the Spring European Council tried to keep sight of and this is why President Prodi also reminded us of the burden of war on Europe’s economic revival. This is the challenge that Parliament too must address. We must take steps towards peace – starting with peace in the Middle East – and towards the political unity of Europe.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, the decision by the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to publish a consultation paper presenting its proposals for an anti-subversion law in accordance with Article 22 of the Basic Law has led to great uproar and concern not only in Hong Kong itself, but also here in the European Parliament. We have very clearly heard what not only people in the religious world but also the business world, the newspapers and journalists in Hong Kong have told us, and we need to take those fears very seriously. There are fears that the opposition is to be silenced, that freedom of speech and freedom of the press, the right to publish and freedom of association are to be curbed, and that the right and the freedom to establish trade unions will no longer be guaranteed. These are genuine fears and we must take them seriously, because we are talking about civil rights that we regard as fundamental values, and we also intend to defend those fundamental values in China. That is why we are calling on the People's Republic of China to respect Hong Kong's autonomy under the ‘one country, two systems’ policy which the previous speakers have already mentioned. That policy must be respected. I call on China to respect it and to ensure that Hong Kong can exercise its own rights and is not subject to any pressure to limit existing rights and freedoms.

Political group: PSE
Indeed, Mrs Damião’s report is warmly supported by the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party. There are two points I should like to make. The climate in the European Union, the business climate, and also ethics and environment. Despite being a key technology, biotechnology is still a poor relation in Europe and also in my own country the Netherlands. I therefore welcome the strategy of the Committee for biotechnology and life sciences, which is contributing to research and development in Europe. Not only for industry, but also with regard to health care and food safety. This does not, however, alter the fact that the committee has been overtaken by events. After all, did we not, in March 2000, adopt the Purvis report whose intention was to improve the business climate in Europe? Did we not also criticise the Member States over the moratorium on the import of genetically modified products? There is still much to be done in Europe in terms of access to launch capital and to patent rights to create a favourable climate. The patent directive for biotechnological inventions is a demonstrable improvement. This directive from 1998, however, has simply been ignored by the majority of Member States. It has only been implemented by four of the 15 Member States. What does the Commissioner intend to do about it? Another major obstacle to progress and application are the ethical and environmental concerns. It is of course entirely proper that we as legislators do not ignore these concerns of the consumer. The Commission’s action plan, however, already provides for the initiation of a social debate. It does not therefore seem necessary to me to strengthen this report with paragraphs that regulate communication with society in detail. We do not, after all, have to hold the consumer’s hand. The consumer is perfectly capable of making up his own mind if we provide the right information.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, quite frankly, I thought I was going to speak after the Commissioner and so I have only just arrived. I just wanted to tell you that I read this text with great interest. I am of the view that the European Union should not underestimate this issue. The thing is that we, as the European Union, live on this Eurasian continent and a large part of humanity is crowded into Asia. For us, the relationship between Europe and its Asiatic partners is of strategic importance. In this, Macao is of great importance because, in this region, a European cultural tradition has become intermingled with an Asian tradition and a whole host of thoughts about human rights and freedom has sprung up. Despite its relatively small size, Macao has an extraordinary bridging function. That is why I am of the view that we Europeans must never abandon Macao. We must also acknowledge that we are not entirely innocent in the fate of many people who lived there in the past and, possibly, of many who will live there in the future. That is why we have an obligation which goes far beyond what Portugal generously took on. I am pleased that Mr Cushnahan and I are speaking in this debate. This gives us a chance to explain that this situation is not only a legacy of the former Portuguese colonial empire but an essentially European concern. We as Europeans must recognise that Asia is our most important strategic partner and whatever brings the European body of thought closer to the Asian body of thought and vice versa, and whatever consolidates thoughts of democracy and the rule of law on the Asian continent, is not only in the interest of people living there but it is also a basic interest of the European Union. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order, I want to correct a misconception about the Irish Constitution which, it has been alleged, bans embryo research in Ireland. The Irish Constitution is in fact silent on the matter, as indeed is Irish law. The Irish Constitution does indeed ban abortion, but it provides for exceptions. The issue is not as black and white as it is being presented.

Political group: PSE
Mr McCartin’s report aims to cut fraud and deceit in the use of European funds: there is too much fraud, too much deceit against Europe. I was wondering this morning on my way to the bar for a coffee – which I have already mentioned several times today – how to explain why I voted for the McCartin report. I closed my eyes for a moment and saw the Beagle Boys walking along the European Parliament’s corridors, and then I had a brainwave. I knew how to explain why I voted for the report and, above all, that I should make a suggestion. I suggest that Europe ask the Beagle Boys – that is, the fraudsters themselves, those who cheat us out of our money – how to avoid being deceived in the future, paying them in the usual way, on a payroll, the fair amount that they deserve. This is perhaps the only way to combat the fraud against Europe’s budget. And now, bon appétit! - Joint Resolution on World Hunger

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, firstly I would like to congratulate the two rapporteurs, Mrs Gill and Mr Mulder, for the excellent work they have done. We look forward to the continuing cooperation that we have had, both inside and outside this House. Secondly, I would like to mention that our committee wishes to maintain all its amendments at this stage, especially those relating to Eurostat. I would also like to welcome the Group's proposal for an oral question to the Commission for the November Strasbourg part-session about the appalling information flow in Eurostat, the problems involving whistleblowers, the audits that lay untouched in Eurostat and the lack of political responsibility in the Commission. We would also like to ensure that our amendments on the Committee of the Regions are maintained in the light of what we have just read in the OLAF report in the confidential reading room. The report says that, in the case of printing contracts, the investigation revealed systematic and flagrant incompetence within the Committee of the Regions. As regards the Financial Controller, the most threatening aspect for the Committee on the Regions seems to be the endemic culture of unprofessionalism and improvisation, where lack of transparency is preferred to openness, for instance in reporting facts to OLAF. The Committee of the Regions will have to answer some serious questions. If we had known those facts when the amendments concerning it were tabled, my committee would have made them more forceful, not only cutting some of the Committee of the Regions' budget, but putting a substantial additional amount into the reserve. We are also very keen to see the amendment tabled by Mr Bösch on the live export of animals adopted and I know that our rapporteurs are working actively to achieve that. I finish as I started by thanking the rapporteurs.

Political group: PPE-DE
I have already indicated, in my remarks on the Fava report, that scaling up may be inevitable, but that unfortunately, the wrong choices are once again being proposed. Mandatory tendering, for a limited period of time, for public tasks by private companies that compete among themselves – something which has been suggested before for public transport and ports – is now also being applied as a solution to organising air safety. This means that each airspace block can end up with a different company, although in the long run, a near-monopoly is bound to emerge and will control the lion's share of the airspace. The neo-liberal ideology will then triumph over safety. In this model, safety has given way to cost-cutting as a primary concern. It is believed that costs can be reduced by the use of fewer staff, and under poorer working conditions. Since these people are dotted around various companies with different interests, which are continually concerned about their chances of winning or losing the next tender, workers get the feeling that their work is no longer as vital as before, and this will inevitably lead to a drop in its quality. Moreover, the military are still not ending their occupation of the airspace. This approach gets no support from me. - Maes report (A5-0265/2002)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, in the light of the unilateral decision made by the United States, I would like to remind you of the conclusions of the intergovernmental group of experts on climate change, which said that if nothing is done to put a brake on the current trend, temperatures may increase by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees by 2100, which will have disastrous consequences for the planet. Sea levels will rise; there will be more severe droughts and more brutal floods; islands, coastal regions and deltas will disappear; we will see famines and epidemics and entire species will become extinct. The poorest populations will be most affected. And this is not necessarily the worst-case scenario. That is why Parliament must take a stand on this issue and express, in the strongest terms, its deep indignation at the decision taken by President Bush to reject the Kyoto Protocol. At a time when populations are quite rightly apprehensive about the prospect of climate change, the consequences of which would be disastrous, the United States, the major consumer of energy in the world, has taken a decision which is totally irresponsible and dangerous. Furthermore, I think that all honourable Members are aware of the fact that the United States has even gone so far as to authorise an oil company to drill for oil in an Alaskan nature reserve. This attitude of allegiance to the interests of multinational companies shows total contempt for both humans and nature. All nations must assume their responsibilities. I welcome the protests made by the European Union, other major countries and Member States. The United States, which signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, must be called to account. We must reject any re-examination of the Kyoto commitments. We must ratify and apply the protocol even without the United States. Commissioner, as we know from past experience that a verbal protest will not be enough, in order to apply effective pressure it would be judicious to include environmental clauses in international commercial negotiations. It is the future of the planet and of our children that is at stake. I do not think it is employment which acts against the environment. Once again, it is the primacy of money that militates against humane and sustainable development, which is the undeniable ambition espoused by the European Union.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, ‘mid-term review’ in connection with Agenda 2000 is one of the crucial concepts in current political discussion across Europe. Every one of us has his own personal preferences when it comes to this important topic, as both the discussions in the Agriculture Committee and the number of amendments submitted bear witness. Both rapporteurs deserve a great deal of gratitude for having made very serious attempts at incorporating in their reports, as much as possible, the well-founded concerns of Members of this House. As a basis for the balance sheet, the mid-term review must be an option for the future; in other words, Agenda 2000 must be a valid and binding framework up to 2006. It is on this basis that the common agricultural policy must be developed further. It is quite clear that the situation in a globalised world market means that all tendencies towards regionalisation have to be rejected. Our common agricultural policy has to be planned on a long-term basis and capable of being worked out by anyone, which means that we must not lose sight of the objective of using streamlining as a means of dismantling bureaucracy. The production types society desires are, above all, to be achieved more by incentives and not so much by commands and prohibitions. One major question is that of how we care for rural areas and keep them alive. The efficient promotion of young farmers is indispensable in this. We also want the second pillar to be strengthened, but what, in the area of agriculture, is meant by this? The objective must be to make clear that environmentally friendly services and maintenance of the countryside do not ‘cost nothing’, but maintain an accountable market value. Reliability and competitiveness for the farmers and hence greater freedom for their business operations when their performance is considered as a whole is the first objective. First-rate product quality, no matter what the production type, and the required income from it, is the second. Monitored safety right along the production chain, Commissioner, is our third objective in further development of the common agricultural policy, and it is an indispensable one.

Political group: PPE-DE
As a member of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, but also as a former government commissioner for administrative simplification in my own country, I can only welcome the unanimous approval, by our committee, of Mrs Jensen’s report. In effect, the introduction of a European Health Insurance Card, which will replace the current paper forms needed for health treatment in another Member State, constitutes a considerable advance for Europeans. I think that we should all be aware of this. The harmonisation of procedures will lead to greater well-being, it will avoid people being confronted by endless paperwork, but above all it will give real mobility to European citizens. This step is an excellent example of the efficacy that can result from a reorganisation of procedures. Thus the famous Form E111, so familiar to tourists and required for short-term stays, will be the first thing to be abolished. The European card will simplify the lives of our fellow citizens, without changing existing rights and obligations. This is something that we all insisted on. This practical and very visible act will increase our sense of belonging to the European Union, just as it will strengthen European citizenship. It is clear that we shall very quickly have to continue our efforts and broaden the scope of the card, so that it includes medical emergency data and information about the health of the holder. For now, let us welcome this new administrative culture which, without a doubt, will be appreciated by the citizens of Europe, who have all too often been disappointed by the slow and cumbersome nature of our procedures.

Political group: ELDR