GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, thank you for your clarification and thank you, Mr Rothley, for this proposal with which you have made another contribution to the further completion of the internal market. We know it is a slow, but steady process. Even if it takes twenty years before the fourth directive is followed by a fifth one, we will get there in the end. I have confidence in this. You, Commissioner, are well on your way to achieving it, and I hope that eventually, we will reach this optimal position. Insurance law is also complex in this case. I myself am a personal injury lawyer and have myself sustained personal injury in the past. This has probably given me the opportunity of working here. It is of extreme importance for this legislation to be transportable to your country of residence, because as the injured party, you often face a great many problems with the various legal systems. So, as far as that is concerned, I am very pleased with the proposal as it is now before us. I think that the insurance companies are also delighted with a further harmonisation, which affords them, too, more clarity. We set up a green card system some time ago, and this takes it further within the EU. The minimum amounts proposed by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market struck me as being very high, because these rarely come into play in practice, if at all. I am therefore actually more pleased with Mr Rothley’s compromise proposals, for they are more geared towards the market as it is in reality. The amounts should not be too high either, because, I believe, enforceability would then become an issue. Nobody benefits from legislation that is not enforceable. I would like to state once again, therefore, that this proposal is closer to reality than the extremely high amounts initially formulated. Then again, the Commission’s proposals are a little on the low side, and I think that what Mr Rothley has proposed is ideal. We Liberals can give our warm support to this proposal. On a different note, in an amendment, I had requested more harmonisation in the discussion of personal injury, in terms of the level of invalidity or the level of the value of the injury. I gather from Mr Rothley that a follow-up report on this is already in the making. I think that we are making another contribution to the internal market’s completion, for which I am grateful. It will receive my unqualified support.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, I wish to begin by paying tribute to Commissioner Verheugen, because it is down to his industry and determination that we are so close to grasping the prize of the reunification of Europe. Credit should be given to his efforts. I should also like to echo his opening words in relation to Lithuania. The decision taken by the Lithuanian Government in relation to the closure of the Ignalina power station is an extremely brave one, as it is not in accordance with general public opinion in Lithuania, and illustrates just how determined the Lithuanians are to fulfil the EU entry requirements. They have moved at tremendous speed in order to catch up, and it has been very difficult for them. However, if accession were suddenly to disappear off the horizon, that decision by the Lithuanian Government and Parliament could well rebound on them and we could find accession moving further away and not closer. It is vital to keep to the timetable and the road map. We must not allow that timetable to be eroded. If we slow down, some of the accession countries – for example, Hungary – will turn elsewhere, perhaps towards the United States rather than the European Union. Political movements that we see within the European Union could well mean that we will be unable to proceed if we miss the Copenhagen Summit deadline. As Commissioner Verheugen quite rightly said: we must take advantage of this window of opportunity before it is closed. Or, as the late, great Elvis Presley said: 'It's now or never, .... Tomorrow will be too late'. History will not judge us extremely well if we fail to show the leadership and courage required at this moment. That is not to suggest that we should somehow weaken our position in relation to our demands on the countries. Each country must be judged on its own merit and keep to the criteria, in particular in relation to implementation and administrative capacity. Let us look at individual countries. The Czech Republic needs to reassure us that competition policy will be in line with EU competition policy and that public administration will be reformed. Latvia has to make serious advances in the reform of its judicial system and in dealing with corruption. I welcome Commissioner Verheugen's plans in relation to Bulgaria and Romania, but we must also send out a message to Romania that it has to get its act together, otherwise it will seriously fall behind schedule. The Brok report should be a warning to them in relation to corruption and reform of public administration. Let us not forget that we have to convince the people that enlargement is in their interests. We should stop talking about the problems of enlargement and remind people that enlargement is a solution to many of those problems.

Political group: PSE
The resolution tabled on the relations between the states of the European Union and Asia (the ‘ASEM process’) has one positive aspect. It confirms that the importance formally attached to human and democratic rights must not remain a dead letter, that the progress achieved (or not) in this field must be assessed at regular intervals and that political consequences must be drawn from these findings. It also calls for strengthening the inter-parliamentary process, so that the governments and heads of enterprise do not have a monopoly over the Asia-Europe 'dialogue', by involving the elected institutions. All this could help us strengthen the impact of independent and cooperative intervention by the social movements and the citizens of Europe and Asia. Yet the resolution also has a very negative aspect. Paragraph 26, which called for respect for the ILO agreements on trade union rights and workers’ rights, has been deleted. ‘Migratory flows’ are once again associated, in the same sentence, with ‘transnational crime’ and ‘terrorism’. The resolution also wants to impose, as a ‘priority’, respect for the ‘world trade order’, in other words, submission to the dictatorship of the WTO and neo-liberal dogmas. In that spirit, it highlights the ‘central role’ that is to be devolved to the ‘Asian-Europe Business Forum’. I therefore abstain on this resolution.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I do not have to tell you what a beautiful and vulnerable coastline the west of Scotland presents. Certainly it is one which is particularly vulnerable and this week we have heard yet further alarming reports of leakages from Sellafield which will damage the coast of Galloway, the Firth of Clyde, Argyle and beyond. It is vital that action of this kind be taken as quickly as possible and I am delighted to have had the opportunity of voting for it today.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the Maoist rebels in Nepal have unilaterally revoked the ceasefire and there have been 250 deaths within a few days as a result. This is the latest painful chapter in the history of this young democracy. The escalation in violence has claimed over 2 500 lives in less than six months. Policemen have been killed indiscriminately, bombs have been set off in the centre of Katmandu and innocent people have forfeited their lives. The Maoist rebellion evokes the risk of civil war, which would obviously be supported by the Communists in China. The economic damage is huge; the number of tourists to Nepal, who alone represent the main source of income, dwindled to 24 000 last month, about 40% fewer than last year. So far, the international community has looked on passively. With the proclamation of a state of emergency and the deployment of the military for the first time, all that has suddenly changed. India has said it will support Nepal with helicopters and night-vision equipment and the United States is considering sending in troops. However, political measures must take precedence. We call on the rebels to lay down their arms and return to the negotiating table. In any case, they will not achieve one of their aims, which is to overthrow the constitutional monarchy. I have visited this country regularly for the last seven years and I know full well that the overwhelming majority are in favour of these government reforms, irrespective of their religious or other affiliations. King Gyanendra deserves our full support. He has recognised the Nepalese constitution and is continuing in his brother's footsteps on the path towards democracy and the rule of law. But we call on the government and the parties to get on with economic and structural reform at long last and to fight corruption consistently. The people deserve proper measures to fight poverty. Commissioner, the European Union has supported Nepal to the tune of EUR 120 million over the last ten years. I have seen many of these projects with my own eyes. They are excellent. We are one of Nepal's most important partners and can therefore bring our full influence to bear as an honest broker. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Environment Commissioner, I am pleased that you are here because we can now address this matter straight away. We are evidently debating a highly technical subject matter, namely the interoperability of both high-speed and conventional rail systems. This gives me the opportunity to make a few comments on the environmental dimension to this proposal. Today, we are essentially witnessing one of many historic moments which those who work in the sector, as well as those who are in favour of trains, have waited for for a long time, because at the end of the day, all this is, of course, meant to culminate in technological harmonisation, which entails the harmonisation of international rail, labour organisations, train drivers who have to make international rail journeys, etc. This also means that employers’ organisations and trade unions will have an entirely different role and outlook with respect to this work. In short, the proposal has a knock-on effect on many other areas and it will be some time before it is a reality. Certainly if I look at the high-speed link and its technical specifications, I share Mr Savary’s view – who has drawn up an excellent report – that it is scandalous that three, nearly four years after the previous directive on interoperability of the high-speed link, we are still waiting for technical specifications for interoperability. This does not bode well at all for the future. What we are aiming for in the long run with this rail proposal is to attempt to cut down on traffic jams but also, more importantly, to benefit the environment, safety and a number of other aspects. It has to be said, and I have already mentioned this several times within other fora, that the rail system is gradually losing its environmental edge, not so much because it does not take any initiatives itself, but more so because we ourselves prescribe few, if any, specifications for example, regarding the use of diesel-electric locomotives, the type of electricity used, etc. What we would like, and this is why we welcome with open arms the dual speed for technical specification requirements, is for this technical specification to at least take account of energy consumption and air pollution, something which will require a great deal of hard work. The second important point is of course the social dimension, as I touched upon a moment ago. I regret that we are confining ourselves to the bare minimum, i.e. working conditions. We refer to a social dialogue but we should really take it one step further, because this affects the entire labour organisation of railways. I would urge you to look into the positive experiences which certain countries have had in changing the labour organisation of the rail system, in order to bring about a more efficient rail system and to set up exchange programmes, so that we can learn from experiences in countries which have struggled in the past, and which are often still struggling where other elements of the rail dossier are concerned, such as liberalisation or fair pricing.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I should like to ask the Commissioner to clarify what he just said. Commissioner, you stated that the Commission is proposing certain measures and alternative employment opportunities in the context of rural development. That at least is what I understood you to have said. May I therefore enquire, Commissioner, whether you could provide tobacco farmers with assurances on alternative employment? Are you in fact guaranteeing jobs? I would be grateful for clarification.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the European Union was built upon the idea ‘never again’, meaning never again do we want to see xenophobia, concentration camps, anti-Semitism, heightened nationalism or war. The one and only significance of the European Union is the will to transcend the atrocious history of the twentieth century which gave the coup de grâce to any ideal of humanism within the heart of Europe, and which is still highly topical today. It is not true to say that, when a government forms an alliance with neo-Fascists somewhere in Europe, this is merely a question of national sovereignty. For this Union of ours is not a grouping of neighbouring nation states who are simply coming to mutual arrangements to improve their collective circumstances. It is a Community that is destined to exist, in which, when the main thing is under threat, when values are under threat, all democrats must bend over backwards to find solutions to ensure that the mistakes of the past are never made again. Let us learn the lessons of the past. In the thirties, when Adolf Hitler was democratically elected, although with a minority, many people thought that it was not as bad as all that and, Mr Poettering, in France, a number of men and women, on the right wing but perhaps of other political persuasions too, thought, ‘Better Hitler in France than the Front Populaire.’ They put their own petty squabbles first, and the rest is history. We must make a rapid, strong and united response. I would have liked to hear your discussion with the Austrian President, Mr Poettering. We are well aware that he is very embarrassed today at the dirty deal that government has done in forming such an alliance. So our response must be rapid and strong. Of course, the Treaty provides us with a barrier when things become intolerable; I was almost going to say ‘irreparable’. History has taught us that Fascists start to blow hot and cold: using heated words first, in populist, xenophobic speeches, and then cool words in order to make themselves acceptable to institutions and to infiltrate them gradually, poisoning them, until the day they start to take action. And when that day comes, it is too late. So our Treaty has made provision for barriers for the time when it is too late, but we are not at that point: today we have to take steps to ensure that we do not get to that point. We must therefore find a political solution. I support the Council proposals in this, while deploring a certain lack of strength, a certain spinelessness, on the part of the Commission which will, however, have to be vigilant on a day-by-day basis, with determination over time, since Fascists count on the spinelessness of democracy, they count on time to wear us down and they hope to impose their views in the end. Our response must be rapid. If today we do not staunchly support the Council, then history will judge us, saying that we achieved the political equivalent of the Munich Agreement.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to read you a newspaper report: Today, President X from country Y has called on that country’s regional authorities to point out Jews and black people in their regions so that they can be arrested. According to this President, Jews and black people have to be arrested, gaoled and exiled. End of quote. You probably wonder which country this report is about, and the timeframe in which it is set. After all, we are only too aware of the historical examples. Replace Jews and blacks by homosexual men and women, and you will realise that I am referring to the very recent statements by the President of Namibia where it appears, not for the first time, that a witch-hunt is being launched. Namibia’s President made his appeal to cleanse his country, as he said, of homosexuals, on 19 March. Despite numerous protests, both from Namibia and elsewhere, he repeated this appeal earlier this week. It is thus not a slip of the tongue but a deliberate campaign. On previous occasions, the anti-homosexual rhetoric uttered by the Namibian President could be laughed off. It seemed to be a personal hobbyhorse of a frightened man who was desperate to hold on to traditional village life. The President’s statements conjure up an image of a community which seems to be losing the battle against sexual promiscuity. However, the criminalisation of homosexuals, mixed in with a generous portion of xenophobia, and the call on Namibian women to know their place, do nothing to address the problem. On the contrary, exploiting the fear of AIDS in this manner is playing with fire. Straightforward advice and the distribution of condoms would be a better solution. Namibia’s anti-homosexual campaign forms a threat, not only to the physical well-being of the potential victims, but also to democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Amnesty International has declared that it considers people who are gaoled on the grounds of their sexual preference or for exercising their right to freedom of expression and assembly to be prisoners of conscience. Namibia must be reminded of its international obligations, which signify that human rights apply to everyone and are universal and indivisible. It is crucial, therefore, for the European Union to ask Namibia, in no uncertain terms, to halt this witch-hunt. Let Namibia follow the lead of its neighbour, South Africa, where the rights of homosexuals are explicitly guaranteed in the constitution. Surely, a country which has fought for its own freedom and against racial discrimination and apartheid cannot embrace sexual discrimination and apartheid.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, given the situation in Burma, as Mrs Napoletano has described it to us, you can imagine what expectations and hopes this strongly-worded resolution on Burma, which is currently a State with no rule of law, will inspire in Burmese civil society. What fears it should inspire in the military junta currently in power, if this resolution determines the EU’s policy with regard to Burma. Until now, the measures taken by the European Union to improve living conditions in Burma, to try to humanise the situation of its millions of inhabitants, have been limited to theory and political statements that have never been followed by action. The political and moral responsibility of the EU is now involved. Perhaps it should be involved to the point of criminal prosecution. Surely the very significant investments made by the Member States, regardless of any development in the military regime, represent de facto collaboration in maintaining the junta in power? Surely European businesses are cynically exploiting the workforce in this prison-State, which has become a general labour camp, where the concept of citizenship no longer applies? This country is certainly far from the European continent and European legislation! Although we are aware of the totalitarian nature of the Burmese regime, however, and the motions for resolution are coming from all sides, the current state of affairs, in other words, the absence of the rule of law, continues under the Burmese sun. We need to activate the European Union’s economic and industrial lever in order to prohibit any investment by the Member States in undemocratic regimes. We need to ensure that the industrial policy of the Member States is a moral one. We also need to use the force of Community diplomatic and political action throughout this Asian region, which has a shared history with some of the Member States and for which relations with Europe are still so important for its development. We must consider the criminals in power in Burma in the current context, in the context of the International Criminal Court that is now permanently operational to prosecute all individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The time for theoretical statements has passed. The European Union owes more than that to the winner of the Sakharov Prize and the Nobel Peace Prize, Aung San Suu Kyi, to the 1200 political prisoners, and through them, to the millions of Burmese citizens. This resolution is very strongly worded and comprehensive. Each paragraph should be part of a framework for a genuine Community policy on the military junta, and therefore to the benefit of Burmese civil society.

Political group: Verts-ALE
My vote in this matter is in support of the need to ensure that the European Patent Office improves its procedures to prevent any patent being used in human cloning. The University of Edinburgh’s application for this patent has nothing to do with cloning (cloning was considered impossible when the patent was filed!) It is established and legitimate practice in both academic and biopharmaceutical research to genetically manipulate human cells in tissue culture. This has been done for many years and is a major method of learning how genes and cells function. It bears no relation to genetic manipulation of people or embryos. It is misleading to suggest that the object of this patent is to genetically manipulate humans. The University of Edinburgh have indicated their willingness to cooperate with any suitable modification of the patent. It think it should be made clear that the potential application of this patent in human cells is to guide the production of particular cells that could be useful in transplantation therapy for conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, strokes, diabetes and heart failure. This is what the Edinburgh research is about.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, thank you for the intensive effort to secure the availability of the dormant funds for the initiative. I believe that even in its technical form, in its institutional form, in the cooperation with the World Bank and a number of countries in Europe and the role that Europe can play in it as coordinator or initiator, the fast track initiative can be exceptionally effective. Perhaps the Commissioner could say something more, without specific reference to each of these countries, about the role that he envisages for the European Union. I understand that he also says that we are prepared to play a coordinating role so that we can deliver added value to the relations with – for example – the ACP countries. I am rather curious about this added value role, not just in financial terms, but also in terms of political leadership and institutional support.

Political group: PSE
With relation to this whole spamming issue, everybody in Parliament is extremely frustrated with the campaign that is taking place. But I have spoken with organisations in the UK and Ireland this morning who are clearly as frustrated as we are. I may be paranoid, but I wonder whether industry is behind this attempt to get a reaction from Members of Parliament. Clearly, though, the organisations I am working with have tried desperately hard to stop this campaign of spamming our e-mail systems.

Political group: Verts-ALE