GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, the situation highlighted by the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, in a country as extraordinary as Brazil, has contributed to undermining a determinist concept of globalisation – the ultraliberal capitalist concept – in which the will of individuals and of peoples, as expressed by the political, social and democratic institutions, is submitted and subordinated to a supposed rationality which, in practice, tends to widen the gulf between the rich and the poor and between opulence and poverty. It is we Europeans who should be concerned about this new reality, and we cannot play down the social demonstrations that express this concern, which, disgracefully, Mr Aznar has just done with regard to the demonstration that is due to take place this week in Barcelona. The countries of the Union already form the greatest economic power in the world, but on its path to becoming a universal political body, the Union must not express its economic power by dominating the sectarian and blind ultraliberal market or by simply imitating the military hegemony of the United States, and these are temptations into which some European Prime Ministers are falling. What we should be doing instead is defending the values and the social and democratic achievements that form the best part of our history, and we should maintain a presence in the world as a factor for peace and for progress, in an action which, as Commissioner Solbes knows, must be a great deal more ambitious than the action presented today by the Commission. We must put forward a concept of global relations that inspires the forthcoming constitution of the European Union.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner Patten, I too this time must depart from my usual custom and praise my colleague, Mrs Mann, for she certainly deserves it. In these eighteen months I have been a Member of the European Parliament, I have become familiar with the fact that Mrs Mann is well versed in a number of areas and particularly transatlantic relations; and this report is an indication of that also. I disagree with Mrs Ahern, who seems to have left the Chamber already, that the report is not sufficiently political. There are actually very political elements contained, for example, in the explanatory statement, which I, at least, enjoyed reading. Of course, the tone is not one of party politics. I warmly support the targeted programme of measures to make the general commercial policy of the EU and its Member States more effective. Closer cooperation might even be regarded as an inevitability when we take into account the amendments made at Nice to Article 133 and those many speeches which were made during the night at Nice in favour of a solution that would also go much further. I agree with the rapporteur, too, that the post-Nice agenda should include finding a new approach to the EU’s commercial policy. The rapporteur’s opinion on the processes of globalisation is also to be supported, and especially her opinion regarding a closer common competition policy, which concerns my own committee in particular – the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. The deadline set for the Commission to submit proposals to Parliament must also receive our support, as too should the use of the ‘sunset’ clause in this regulation. These dates set should not, however, mean that the Commission should not have an ongoing obligation to keep Parliament up to date on the progress of the action programme. Of all the actions covered by the proposal I would in particular like to emphasise the importance of cooperation projects with the United States of America. For example, TABD, the TransAtlantic Business Dialogue, has, as far as I can see, worked well and succeeded in preventing trade disputes and bringing about coordinated views in areas requiring a swift reaction. A good example is the Istanbul World Radio Conference last spring. Transatlantic trade is still the thread of life as far as the global economy is concerned, and the importance of cooperation in this area must not be underrated. We have to remember that there is also a strongly political element connected with this cooperation, the basis for which was created in 1995 with the signing of the New Transatlantic Agenda. Furthermore, Parliament wants to be involved in this work and has therefore attempted to seal its relationship with the US Congress in the spirit of the transatlantic dialogue that my colleague, Mrs Read, also mentioned earlier.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, there is a new doctrine taking shape in international law, according to which no country can treat its citizens or the people living within its territory in any way it likes, and the sovereignty of the state can no longer prevent outside intervention when there are gross violations of human rights, not even when the government is legally or even democratically elected. Living examples of this have been the Pinochet-Ugarten case, Kosovo and, in milder form in our own Union, the debate surrounding the government decision in Austria. This is what is at stake now in Cambodia unless the leaders of the previous oppressive regime are bought to justice. At the same time, the struggle against impunity is under threat. The situation should also remind us all that the ratification of the Treaty for an International Criminal Court has been shamefully slow.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Thank you very much to Mr Veltroni for giving us such a valuable report. It is a welcome clarification on where Parliament stands on digital and audiovisual sector issues for the forthcoming revision of TV without frontiers. However, I want to confine my remarks this evening to public service broadcasting in the digital age because there are some very important public access issues that we need to address when defining the principles from the crossover in our current media to the development of digital broadcasting. Defining the values and principles underlying public broadcasting gives us some difficulties anyway, as Member States, corporations, and broadcasters all have very different ideas of what public broadcasting constitutes. However, this should not prevent us from defining it in the digital age, because these principles are very important to us all, and, as infrastructure has developed, so content is going to develop as well. We are all being told that we are entering a knowledge-based society, and if that is the case, then knowledge in a sense becomes power that defines the powerless and the powerful, the information poor and the information rich. Overcoming that divide, to my mind, should be one of the key points that we emphasise in this report. There are a number of reasons why this is important to us from the perspective of European content. First of all, if we are in a knowledge-based society, we need growth in knowledge-based and creative skills. Secondly, we are a democratic society, and digital policy in the audiovisual sector can connect our local citizens to our citizens at the centres of power. In terms of cultural richness and diversity, it is important both that we should have individual centres of cultural excellence and that we be bound as a European continent. And, finally, we have to ensure that the switchover from analogue to digital is attractive to all of our citizens: that is the end which we should work to achieve.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we must congratulate our colleague, Mr Ebner, on this further resolution from Parliament to promote so-called regional or minority languages. During the European Year of Languages, the Council even went so far as to state that all languages are equal in dignity. That is all very well, but as the joke goes, some are more equal than others. Those that are more equal than others are the official languages of the Union. The others, although equal in dignity, are not equal in law. My national language, Catalan, is spoken by more than 10 million citizens of the European Union. These 10 million people cannot use their own language in their relations with the Union. We are therefore discriminated against in relation to our fellow European citizens. Why? It is because we Catalans have not had our own State since Barcelona was taken by the Franco-Spanish armies on 11 September 1714. We therefore know what has to be done. The democratic exercise of the right to self-determination will one day soon resolve our European linguistic problem. I give you my word.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, would dedicating a resolution from this House on extreme poverty on this occasion be giving in to opportunism? I would like to remind you that on 17 October 1987 Father Wrezinski, with 100 000 people, talked about the life of the poorest families and people in our whole society and since that day, the World Day to overcome extreme poverty reminds us each year that it is our duty to unite in respecting human rights when they are violated. If we adopt this resolution today, we are paying tribute not only to the commitment of the families and people who face extreme poverty themselves, but also to the commitment of all the associations and citizens who stand beside them. Also, throughout the European Union, especially since the Lisbon summit, the public, national and European authorities are constantly highlighting the fight against exclusion and particularly the need for an integration policy. It is in this spirit that today, on behalf of my group, I am presenting this resolution, which asks the Member States to develop real strategies aimed at equal access for all to fundamental rights such as education, housing and healthcare as well as culture and sustainable employment. It is also in this spirit that we are asking the European authorities and, as far as we are concerned, our Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, in cooperation with the Commission, to make an assessment of the policies conducted in the field every 17 October and thirdly, we ask, for the future of course, that a stone be laid in the square in front of the European Parliament in Brussels in honour of the victims of poverty like those laid in the squares at the Trocadero in Paris, the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, in Berlin, Rome and at the UN. It is a simple but nevertheless important tribute that we want to pay today by putting forward this resolution.

Political group: PPE-DE
Access to water is essential for life, health, food, well-being and development. Water should not therefore be considered simply as a good, but as a public asset. It is particularly shocking that 1.7 million people have no access to drinking water, causing 30 000 deaths per day through related diseases. While the shortage of drinking water in developing countries has worsened, however, the privatisation of water utilities continues apace, particularly as a result of the conditions for receiving loans imposed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and structural adjustment programmes which weaken public services and induce under-investment in this sector. The liberalisation or privatisation of water utilities has helped deprive poor communities of access to water and has driven prices up. A serious assessment of the socio-economic and environmental effects of liberalisation is therefore needed, as are guarantees that Articles VI and XXI of the General Agreement on Trade in Services will be revised, in order to protect the right of each developing country to decide freely on its method of water supply. The establishment of a European Water Fund is a good initiative in principle, as long as it supports the water policy of the beneficiary countries by ensuring public ownership and management so that, as a result, everyone will have access to water, without discrimination.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I wish to add my congratulations to the rapporteur on an excellent and timely report. In my earlier speech I was unable to take the time to do so. I should like to wish the Commissioner well. We could perhaps have a cheap go at him this morning for not being here but, if he is not well, we wish him a speedy recovery. Unlike Mr Cunha I cannot offer him a remedy for a speedy recovery, but a hot Irish whiskey is not bad for the flu either. I should like to say that this report addresses many current concerns in the fisheries sector and certainly rebuilding the stocks of cod and hake is going to be a tremendous challenge. We have to face the reality that this is going to be extremely difficult to achieve. That is the one thing that we have learned recently. But the truth is that it has to be achieved if we want to maintain stocks in our seas. We have to do everything the rapporteur has outlined: increase net size, bring in square mesh panels and recognise, above all, that we must face up to the problems created by discards. This is something that has not been faced up to. We have paid lip service to it but have not been able to resolve the problem. Protection of juveniles is equally important and must be one of our priorities. We must have improved scientific information: there can be no broad-brush approach, as has been said. In my area in the Irish Sea we now face, for the third year running, the closure of the fishing area for six weeks. There is greater willingness among fishermen to cooperate with the authorities and the European Union to achieve the recovery of stocks. I have to ask the Commission one question: does it really feel in all honesty that it has responded to the fishermen in this area? I have to say that it cannot bring in closures and tie-ups to help recovery without compensation, as this will not work. I would say to the Commission that it is not myself, the rapporteur or any Members in this House with an interest in fisheries, but rather the fishermen who are out there working, trying to make a living and trying to survive in very difficult circumstances who need convincing of the need for this. The Commission will not obtain their cooperation unless they are given the support they require.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to start by offering my thanks to bus manufacturers, operators and drivers. When it comes to road safety and environmental sustainability, they are first-rate. Two and a half years ago the European Commission published a report on the use of 15-metre buses and coaches, in which it referred not only to distortions in competition between transport companies in various EU Member States, but also, I am pleased to say, offered prospects of greater safety and improved comfort. Today, we finally have before us a directive to this effect, one that I have been calling for on an almost monthly basis since then. Particularly in view of the present heightening of distortions in competition because of unilateral decisions by many Member States on energy pricing, as a result of which Europe has lost credibility in the eyes of a large section of the public, we urgently need to point the way here. Let us give some positive signals: first by harmonising permissible maximum lengths for rigid buses and rigid bus-trailer combinations, secondly, by clarifying the situation as regards removable attachments such as luggage trailers and skiboxes, and thirdly, by bringing the cornering test in line with scientific and technical progress and also with the current version of the ECE Regulation, which has been tried and tested since 1996. Furthermore, it is totally in the spirit of subsidiarity that Member States are to be granted a long transitional period, up to 2015 to be precise, during which the use within national territory of buses which are currently permitted but do not yet comply with the new requirements of the directive will be allowed. And of course local and regional authorities remain at liberty to impose restrictions on 15-metre buses in places where there are traffic management problems, such as narrow streets in historical town centres. However, national protectionist measures going beyond this are not acceptable. I would like to thank the rapporteur and to congratulate him, and I ask you to vote for Amendments Nos 1, 2, 3 and 6.

Political group: PPE-DE
If I have understood the Commissioner correctly, there are two key aspects to this matter, of which one is the potential desire to provide this free packaging when tobacco is sold. I believe – I am not speaking in my personal capacity but on behalf of several Members, who have waged this fight side by side with the Commissioner throughout the work carried out on this proactive and important directive – that we are talking here about vital issues, and this is something that needs to be said! Our position is therefore to say that we find it extremely hard to accept this sort of legal fatalism. Not all being legal specialists but not, equally, being naive, we are fully aware that a legal solution – and we hope that one exists – will be extremely difficult to find. It is nevertheless also very hard to accept that these small objects, which some people see merely as items of fun but which are completely unacceptable, and which affect and even defeat the object of our directive, are sold in quantity today: 50 000 per day and that is only one brand, Commissioner! This is a fashionable item more or less everywhere in the Member States. In my question I refer to twelve States, but the problem certainly occurs in all the Member States and the candidate countries. I therefore believe that some serious legal work needs to be done. We must find a solution, all the more because the Commission proposes, and we support it in this battle, to go further by including photographs. These will make the fashion more appealing and will further speed up the process of selling the products and the desire to cover up the reality. What can we do if that happens? As to the second aspect, are the manufacturers themselves including this packaging? In most cases, they are not, but in some, it is the manufacturers of lighters that offer these products, which is not far off.

Political group: ELDR
Parliament was asked to deliver an opinion on control measures applicable under the Convention on future multilateral cooperation in the North-East Atlantic fisheries, ensuring a comprehensive monitoring and inspection scheme that will enable the resources in the area covered by this international convention to be exploited on a sustainable basis. With the Stevenson report now before us, Parliament urges the Commission to be more consistent in managing sustainable fisheries, and calls for a clarification of Community competences in the field of monitoring and inspection. The report also calls for more information to be provided on the costs of monitoring and inspection services operating in the Member States. The Convention on future multilateral cooperation in North-East Atlantic Fisheries (NEAFC) provides for a mechanism to ensure the monitoring and inspection of fishing grounds. The European Union chose to divide this task between the Commission and the Member States. In practice, however, this situation has led to problems in implementation, and to some constraints, which are to be expected when responsibilities are divided. Without completely rejecting the system chosen by the EU, Parliament must exert pressure to ensure a greater clarification of the competences of each party, the Commission on the one hand and the Member States on the other. One such clarification might involve creating a Community Inspection Agency. – Kindermann report (A5-0020/2004) President. – Mrs Stihler, as this is a report that falls under Rule 110 (b) of the Rules of Procedure, the explanations of vote can in theory only be given Having, however, made the mistake of giving the floor to Mr Fatuzzo, who was in the same position as yourself, I am happy to give it to you.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, although 13 countries have banned and, for the most part, done away with asbestos, because it is a proven carcinogenic, Greece is still applying Community legislation which allows asbestos to be used until 2005, thereby endangering the lives and health both of workers in the sector and society as a whole. Environmental protection and protection for public health are clearly not the European Union’s priorities, despite what it may say. Its priority is to pursue maximum profits for big business. The asbestos scandal is a blatant example of the cruelty of the capitalist system and it is high time action was taken to ban the extraction, processing and use of asbestos products. At the same time, measures need to be taken to protect public health from asbestos and to compensate workers in the sector for the damage which their health has suffered all these years.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by congratulating Mr Howitt on his work on an elaborate report in which it would have been easy to either go too far or not go far enough. If we look at the concept of companies, there was a longstanding economic concept that a company was an organisation of people, which, through controlling goods and services, had the aim of producing goods and services for a market. This is a purely economic concept. However, the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, which was recently enacted in Directive 2001/23, talks about a company as an organised group of people and elements enabling a business activity to be conducted pursuing their own objective. This is clearly a much broader concept which we could also relate to recital C of the report, which says that within companies and among investors a consensus is developing that they have a broader mission than simply making profits, and that the challenge for success lies in combining profitability with sustainability and responsibility. I think that companies, whatever their format, however many staff they have or whatever funds they have, live in a global world in which their voluntary, encouraged and prompted contribution, and I realise what I am saying, I am not saying compulsory or imposed by law, to achieving a better society, has a new meaning. As it says in the Green Paper, although the main responsibility of the company is to generate profits, it can also contribute at the same time to achieving social and environmental objectives, and that should not be seen solely as an obligation or responsibility for particular types of companies or companies that operate in particular sectors. I think that this is a good instrument for fulfilling the Lisbon strategy: an economy that is as developed as possible, creating more and better jobs, which respects the environment and guarantees social cohesion. It will ultimately be a suitable instrument for establishing the European social model and it will also be good for companies, because profitability and social responsibility go hand in hand and cannot be separated from each other.

Political group: PPE-DE