GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, many thanks, Mr Bushill-Matthews, for this excellent report. I would like to present briefly the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, and I do not want to devote myself to long explanations about why small and medium-sized enterprises are the economic backbone of European society. SMEs find access to finance ever more difficult, and a look at the agreements that Basle II will bring with it leads us to assume that this finance will become even more problematic. New methods of finance, such as venture capital, initial public offers, or all the other things currently being tried out or referred to, certainly represent a feasible way ahead, and one to which we in Europe will have to give thought, but not one to be used similarly by all SMEs. It is for that reason that I am glad that the Commission is taking up this issue on Europe's behalf. I would like, on the basis of my practical experience and of my discussions with many owners of SMEs, to tell the Commission of my principal concern, which is that future promotion of SMEs should also be tailored to their needs. Many owners of SMEs have no idea, or it is very hard for them to find out, where any kind of support at a European level is to be had. Support is meant to be transparent. Then I often hear complaints that support at a European level is very complicated, that compliance with the requirements imposed on SMEs is very difficult and that this often made the whole thing very expensive. Thirdly, all this should also be calculable in good time. Very lengthy application procedures stretched over many years result in small entrepreneurs quite simply running out of breath and not making it through to the final stages of the process. This means that everything possible needs to be done by the Commission to ensure that support for SMEs meets the needs of applicants from the target group, that is, the owners of the enterprises themselves. At a European level, though, we can ease the burden on SMEs or do justice to them not only by offering finance, but we should also consider how we might remove the burden from them by avoiding additional bureaucracy and regulation, which weigh down on them more and more. I believe it would be highly appropriate to put in place a screening procedure in the Enterprise Directorate-General which would make it possible to lodge a veto in good time, permitting the passage of regulations beneficial and appropriate to SMEs and excluding those detrimental to them.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to put forward an oral amendment and change the wording in points 4, 9, 11, 13 and 15 from ‘multiple sclerosis’ to ‘multiple sclerosis and other similar diseases’. (The President established that there were no objections to the oral amendment) (Parliament adopted the resolution) *** President. That concludes the vote. Colleagues, thank you for your cooperation today and throughout the year. I wish you a happy Christmas. I look forward to working with you, full of new energy and vigour in the New Year! EXPLANATIONS OF VOTE Report: Joan Colom I Naval (A5-0456/2003)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would also like to add my thanks to the rapporteur for his work on this very important report. The explosion in broadcasting technologies has caused many parents to lose control over what their children watch, and the growth of digital, cable and satellite TV, as well as home computer technology, means that parents are increasingly powerless to monitor their children's viewing habits. According to some reports, parents were not aware of the facilities, such as the blocks on pay TV and Internet filters, which help them control what their children watch. Parents need to be given more information on how these work and how trustworthy they are. Children's welfare is primarily the responsibility of their legal guardians, but this does not absolve suppliers and distributors of audiovisual content of their responsibilities. Both sides must take full responsibility in this regard. The degree of self-regulation in broadcasting differs from one Member State to another, but we all agree that we must work towards some commonality in this area and that self-regulation must be underpinned by some legal basis. Finally, child pornography on the Internet is unforgivable, and there are vast numbers of websites with illegal content located outside the European Union. I commend the report to the House and thank the rapporteur again for his excellent initiative in this regard.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, the matter under discussion is very intricate and complex, and is one that will have a very far-reaching effect on the food industry. For that reason, I wish to thank the rapporteur: we are grateful to you for your excellent work. In the main this report can be adopted. I would, however, like to draw attention to one point, and that is Amendment No 15. There are Member States where processing is on a very small scale. The requirement, therefore, that different categories of activity should have a separate building is unreasonable as far as these countries are concerned. For example, in my own country we have two plants, both of which already have clearly separate and properly supervised production lines. If we were to find ourselves in a situation where we had to construct separate buildings for one more separate production line that would be unreasonable considering the small volumes being processed. In my opinion the issues mentioned previously in the Council’s formulation have been taken proper account of, and I would hope the Council’s and the Commission’s position will enter into force with regard to this matter.

Political group: ELDR
Commissioner, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, today is the last time that this House will be able to discuss the process by which the ten new Member States are acceding to the European Union. There remain only 51 days before the historic date of 1 May 2004, on which the European Union will grow to become a Union of 25 Member States. This particular enlargement of the European Union will be accomplished on Workers’ Day, a date symbolising our need to face up to the challenge of giving the Union of 25 states economic and social cohesion. It is no less significant that, the internal policy of the enlarged Europe being a work of peace, we are developing it into a real, outward-looking common European peace policy. I have made Cyprus my concern ever since I entered this House in 1984, a time when few thought its accession a realistic prospect. Then, a few years later, Parliament forcefully urged that a solution to the Cyprus problem should not be made a precondition for its accession. I well remember such former Members of this House as Mrs Pauline Green, Mr Jan Willem Bertens, and Mr Yannos Kranindiotis; we believed that the accession process would be the catalyst that would bring about unification. There is now a substantial chance of the 30-year-long division of Cyprus being brought to an end even before 1 May. Not merely is it to be hoped, it is also to be expected, that the negotiating parties will indeed seize this opportunity, which may well be the last for a long time, and I hope and trust that Turkey will stand by its recent indications of willingness to work towards a solution. We must bring about a united Cyprus, in which all Cypriots can live together in peace, and which can play a full part as a Member State of the EU.

Political group: PSE
I would like to thank the Commissioner for his answer and his words of encouragement, but what we have to take on board is that we are in a transitional phase at the moment, when it comes to EU aid to Serbia. We are in the transitional phase between emergency aid and aid which is more structural in nature. I believe we have well and truly reached a point where we can start banging the table for a while. There is a great deal of scepticism on the part of the Albanian Kosovars towards the Kostuníca regime. The people are getting rather desperate. There have been hunger strikes. The people now want to see real progress. I understand there is an adviser from the Commission amongst Mr Kostuníca’s immediate entourage, a man who has already won his spurs amongst the President of Montenegro’s entourage I might add. What I would like the Commission to do is exploit this transitional period to the full by telling Serbia that we are not going to carry on delivering aid unless they solve this pressing problem.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I congratulate Mrs Foster on her excellent report, which I fully support. This is a piece of work that demonstrates considerable technical understanding in addressing an issue of crucial importance for the future of civil aviation and in respect of which I should like to emphasise the following points: - the need for the Member States to commit themselves to drawing up a comprehensive policy for financing security in air travel, which must be entirely under government control, because security threats against aviation are a manifestation of threats against the state; - the need to pass a number of common laws in the field of civil aviation under the terms of the agreements concluded at the European Civil Aviation Conference, as a means of increasing airport security in the European Union.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, thank you for your reply. The question I posed, Question No 5, was very specific. As you are aware, the population of Western Sahara depends almost exclusively on the European Union aid provided through ECHO for its survival. My question was whether the Council will support the continuation of the humanitarian aid to the population of Western Sahara throughout the process you described.

Political group: PSE
On my own behalf, I should first of all like to thank Mr Bowis for letting me go first, because I am having to receive a visitors’ group, a choir, that will be opening the Dutch week shortly. This is why I should like to leave at 11 a.m. Mr President, it is not the first time that a very emotional and very passionate debate is taking place on the subject of the supply of blood. The opinions on this subject are diverse, even between my good friend, Mr Nisticò, and myself. We do however agree on one thing, namely that the safety of the supply of blood must be paramount because too many people rely on blood products. Patient organisations – and I would quote haemophiliac associations – were right to get involved in the debate, but their opinions are also diverse. Moreover, these different opinions run parallel with whether or not a Member State is self-sufficient in the organisation of the supply of blood and blood production. I come from a Member State where self-sufficiency is paramount, and the voluntary, unpaid donation, the so-called 'gratis principle', underlies the organisation of our supply of blood. I am not able, or prepared, to impose our principle on other countries, and I am talking to Mr Nisticò when I say this. He asked for subsidiarity a moment ago. This should not, and cannot, entail the undermining of our principle of voluntary 'gratis' self-sufficiency. For this reason, I would ask Mr Nisticò to bring up for discussion the principles that were laid down at first reading in Parliament and confirmed at second reading by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. This means that we need to make a positive recommendation on the agreements in the framework of the trilogue, involving Mr Lund, Mr Nisticò and others, namely in order to continue to enable the Dutch people, the northern Member States, to maintain their own organisation, which is also the gist of Amendment No 19. Mr Nisticò, I am prepared to withdraw my support for Amendment No 7 if you can assure me, in the framework of this subsidiarity, that Amendment No 19 will also be supported, including by Members whose countries operate a different system. Please allow me to comment on a second amendment. We will support Amendment No 20, Mr Lund’s compromise to replace Amendment No 10, which enables a Member State to continue to determine its own organisation and its own blood policy. This is also backed by Mr Nisticò. This compromise receives my unqualified support, for I think it is an improvement on the original amendment which I had tabled on Amendment No 10. I should like to urge all of you once again to support Amendment No 19.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, firstly and most importantly, my thanks to the rapporteur for his excellent report, which gives a good overview of the many problems Afghanistan is still having to face. Allow me to examine the Commissioner’s communication in greater depth, however. Commissioner, you have overwhelmed us a little with figures, and I admit that they are impressive. However, I am wondering about the following. We have here a country which is in need of reconstruction, which must first and foremost reconstruct itself, and an economic basis is a prerequisite for this. As you emphasise, the fight against opium cultivation is a very important aspect, but, in all the various measures forming part of the strategy to combat that opium cultivation, I have not actually heard what alternatives the producers have. I have seen documentaries showing how the military descend upon farming communities and destroy everything for the sake of opium cultivation. I do understand the necessity of this, but how do we mean for it to stop if people do not have an alternative income? The same goes for the warlords. How are they ever to stop being warlords if they are constantly being supplied with money from the opium economy? Finally, I had actually wanted to speak about women, but I cannot because my time is up. I should like to give one example, however: the construction of a women’s centre in Kabul on which work had only taken a few months. It was built, it was inundated with women looking for education and health care, it was a place where they could take off their burkas in peace. It is possible; why is it, then, that we are so slow to produce results with international resources?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, as permanent rapporteur for the agencies, I would like to make the following budget-related points in addition to the opinion on this project, on which the Committee on Constitutional Affairs has led. My first point is that this regulatory agency should have its headquarters, for reasons of cost, close to the Commission. The second is that the functions of the regulatory agencies should be limited to the creation of secondary legislation linked to the Commission’s initiatives and should be subject to the approval of the budgetary authority. Thirdly, I believe it to be important that the new regulatory agencies should exercise their autonomy subject to the direct control of the Commission and to the political control of the European Parliament. Fourthly, it should also be laid down that all the provisions of the Financial Regulation and of the Staff Regulations shall apply to the regulatory agencies. Fifthly and finally, the Commission should, before submitting any legislative proposal for the establishment of a regulatory agency, present an assessment of its budgetary consequences and of its profitability, as well as proposals for the redeployment and management of human resources. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the conditions of my intervention in this plenary session are illustrative of the budgetary problem. I have just hurried from a meeting which, according to the Treaty, does not exist. I am participating, on behalf of Parliament, in the tripartite dialogue on the budget to set the budgetary guidelines. This is precisely the point we have raised on behalf of the Committee on Budgets. It is the adaptation of the Treaty, Article 272 in particular, to the real situation. We have spent twelve years practising with a timetable set by the interinstitutional agreements. We have renewed them three times, and we believe that the time has come to include the fundamental principles in the Treaty so that we will not find ourselves in legally dubious situations, such as the case of the meeting which I have just mentioned. Specifically, we must simplify the procedure in order to prevent the blocking of the budgetary procedure. When there are 25 members, the current procedure will not work. We should simplify it while respecting the existing balances of power. Lastly, Madam President, we also believe that Parliament, as an institution embodying democratic legitimacy, must fully participate in the decisions on own resources.

Political group: PSE
Thank you, Mr President. Not so long ago, there was a war in Ethiopia, the Ogaden War, and there was a war in the north of Kenya, the Rift War, and the intention of both wars was to unite all Somalis in one country. If we consider the situation today, it has completely changed. The Somalis are fighting each other more than they do other governments in neighbouring countries in order to reunite Somalia. As it would appear today, the country is breaking up into all kinds of groupings. The most stable area seems to be the north, and what was the subject of consultation two years ago, a transitional national government, in actual fact, came to nothing. Everyone is now at war with each other, which is a dangerous situation. It means that we in Europe, and other countries in the region, will be receiving many refugees from Somalia, and I do not know whether they will be welcome everywhere. There is also a considerable risk that it is a breeding ground for extremist groupings. We know all too well since 11 September what the implications of that could be. What can the European Union do in the current situation? In my view, it should first and foremost apply the special rules of the Cotonou Agreement, because we all know that Somalia was unable to sign this agreement and is not a member of it either; but the special provisions will need to be applied in this instance. This means that we would then be able to alleviate human suffering and grant emergency aid, and I gather that that is what the Commission is doing. However, in the regions that enjoy a certain level of stability, we can start repairing and building roads, hospitals, and suchlike, so that some sense of stability will return to the region. Above all, it is up to the Somalis to solve their problems; we could never do this for them. The role of the neighbouring countries is also crucial. In the light of their past, do they really want Somalia to be reunited? This is something that I very much doubt. Someone has already raised the forthcoming IGAD Conference in Nairobi; if I counted correctly, this is the fourteenth in the course of a decade or so. Let us hope that it will be successful this time round. Given the signs, I am not so optimistic as the previous speakers, but in my view, the Italians still know Somalia better than any other nationality in the EU. I hope that they will be proven right. It is also up to the European Commission to get the EU Member States, in particular, to sing from the same hymn sheet. I have a feeling that if we look at the United Kingdom’s attitude, or Italy's, these are quite different. The European Commission has some missionary work to do in this area too, for which I wish you every success.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, a number of Members have expressed concern about the humanitarian situation in Iraq. What we can say with confidence is that the situation of the people of Iraq will be enormously improved with the removal of Saddam Hussein and his tyrannical regime. This House should congratulate the actions of the coalition armed forces, in particular of the United States and the United Kingdom, who have been instrumental in bringing about the downfall of that ghastly regime. I am sorry that Saddam's supporters in this House have been confounded. We should congratulate the coalition armed forces for their restraint and their great success.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I was rather surprised to hear the Commissioner state that we have recovered the money from the Ivory Coast. I would be very grateful to the Commissioner if, within or without the framework agreement, he could inform me – in writing if necessary – where all this has been recorded, so that we can understand this.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I do not fully understand your reply to Mr Schulz, since, according to your reply to my letter of 15 May, you acknowledge that you have received documents from the Spanish Supreme Court relating to the request for the waiver of the immunity of Mr Berlusconi and Mr Dell'Utri, and that does not square with your reply to Mr Schulz.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, my heartfelt thanks and respect are owed to the rapporteur, who has drafted this material with much energy, discipline and intelligence. I admire him most of all for not losing his Roman cheerfulness despite what was at times a very difficult process. Many thanks also to my colleagues in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, where we had what I think was one of our most interesting debates to date. The discussions in this House have also shown that views on threshold values and social standards cut across Group lines, and we can look forward to tomorrow's vote with great excitement. I see a requirement for the new Directives to be progressive, fair and functional. We support the modernisation proposed by the Commission, for example with regard to the introduction of electronic auctions and the electronic submission of tenders. What greatly worries me, though, is that on one point the Directive is not being made fairer. I am referring here to the issue of social and environmental standards. It is for the benefit of the other members of my group that I would like to expressly reiterate that the issue is not, for us, that social and environmental criteria have no part to play in the procedure whereby contracts are awarded. No! Mr Hager has shown that very clearly. These standards must be laid down in the description of the product. We want to avoid the situation where, when the contract is awarded at the end of the process and the tenders have been compared and it is clear that tender no. 1 is the best in economic terms, no. 2 is worse, no. 3 is even worse than that and no. 4 is the worst of all, there is then another assessment which establishes that one firm is more socially responsible because it employs more disabled people and another more ecological because it has a waste management system, whereupon it is decided, despite the fact that there was another tender which was better in economic terms, to award the contract to the more expensive firm after all. That is the situation we want to avoid, for it would run counter to the internal market. That is why this is such an important point for us, and a Directive with standards of that sort would basically be no use to us anymore.

Political group: PPE-DE