GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I would like to remind the House of the importance of the proposal we are debating today, for various reasons. Firstly, I believe we should make it very clear that this is a very important first step towards a common European asylum system which, in the long term, will be valid throughout the Union. Secondly, I believe that we must not now forget that what we are doing is no less than fulfilling one of the objectives agreed at the Tampere European Council, where respect for the right to asylum was reaffirmed in a completely unconditional way. Thirdly, despite possible discrepancies between parliamentary groups on certain points of the proposal we debated, we must not forget that, in reality, we are providing all the European national systems with a structure that may operate efficiently in accordance with the Geneva Convention on the status of refugees. I believe that the European Union, from this Parliament, cannot look the other way and fail to implement the instruments that Europe is developing at this moment. We must remember the Charter of Fundamental Rights which this House recently approved and that, if it is to be borne in mind in this particular field, it must always be with a view to implementing that which was agreed in the Geneva Convention and never to reduce it. For one reality we cannot forget is that, since the second half of 1996, the number of asylum seekers in the European Union has increased considerably, while the resolutions which recognise and grant that right have diminished alarmingly. For all these reasons I believe that the amendments that we have adopted in committee and which we are presenting to Parliament today have substantially improved the Council’s proposal and have highlighted certain very interesting questions, especially with regard to the safeguards for asylum seekers, the principle of non-return and also certain essential minimum requirements throughout the process of taking decisions on the recognition of this status, which require that each case be studied individually. These asylum requests cannot be resolved collectively. Despite the Commission’s misgivings, I believe that we will have taken a great step forward with these amendments, if they are also adopted today in Parliament.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, frankly I must say that, emotionally speaking, my speech will be different from one that I would have made before 11 March 2004, that is to say before the tragic events that took place in Spain. Let us be honest: we had partially accepted, or at least we had become accustomed to the 11 September tragedy and therefore the issue concerning the data requested by the United States also fell within a normal dispute over legitimacy. I believe that we need to start with the assumption that, no matter what, citizens must be clearly informed in advance of the fact that they are going to face such requirements and, consequently, such control. Citizens also need to be just as clearly informed of the use and the destination of the information, particularly information that goes beyond mere personal details and can, for example, reveal membership of a religion, of a political movement or indicate tastes or habits of an extremely sensitive nature. On this subject, I would like to mention Directive 95/46/EC, which I quoted a short while ago pertaining to a request for clarification directed at Commissioner Bolkestein on the linguistic census in South Tyrol. I hope, Commissioner, to have an answer sooner or later, before the day is out. There is a principle that is also valid in this case, that is to say where Article 6(1)(c) states that the personal data that are collected must be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and/or further processed. Precisely: I believe that the phrase ‘not excessive in relation to the purposes’ gives the debate a much wider scope. The purposes are known: this is about combating terrorism; and – quite truthfully – doubts are being alleviated, at least as far as I am concerned, and I am also managing to overcome my doubts about the number of agencies that have access to the data, about the fact that an immediate access system is used, about the absence of appeal procedures and many other aspects. If I consider the fact that this is all for a purpose such as the one that we are aware of – combating terrorism – then I consider it a necessary sacrifice for a higher purpose.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I too would like to offer my congratulations to Mr Bowis as rapporteur. We have heard various fine phrases quoted about diet. Let me offer one more: variety in moderation. The selection found on overflowing shelves has long since made this a genuine option. But the creation of a new authority or agency cannot change the eating habits of many members of the public, or the way we prepare and store food, or people's inadequate knowledge about preparing a balanced diet. Making food safer does not remove the need for consumers to act responsibly. Commissioner Byrne, it sounds to me as if we will have fewer and fewer producers but more and more inspectors. I am worried that Europe is again in danger of creating an overblown bureaucracy that is incapable of taking action. How exactly will the Agency's powers be divided with national inspection authorities? I am concerned that this will be another millstone round our necks. This new authority will not strike a blow for freedom in terms of consumer policy. Who will be suing whom in future food scandals? We are always discussing the division of powers in the context of enlargement of the European Union. But this concept also plays a key role in food safety. Strict application of the 'polluter pays' principle will remain essential in repairing economic damage in future. The consistency of the White Paper on food safety leaves something to be desired in places. The timetable for achieving its objectives varies greatly according to the wishes of many stakeholders. So we will not stand in the way of establishing this body any more with today's debate. However, I do believe that we should not raise our hopes too high by imagining that this body will be a cure for all ills in future.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the closure of Strasbourg Airport on Monday evening, which of course held us all up for quite some time, has prompted me to put a question to the Commission on the following subject. It would be a good idea to have an overview of all the aircraft within European airspace, coordinated centrally: within Eurocontrol, for example. Obviously it is the countries themselves that are responsible for national air traffic control systems, but would it not be appropriate to have a central overview of all the current and planned flights, whether they be civil or military, in order to improve utilisation of the airspace, reduce the number of delays and lessen the impact on the environment?

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, fear is a bad counsellor. I can understand Israel’s desire to protect itself, but the wall is inappropriate in this case. A UN report last September condemned the wall as illegal and charged Israel with unlawful annexation. You, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, are of the opinion that the hearings and decisions of the International Court of Justice will disturb the peace process. I do not share this view. Like Mr Cohn-Bendit, I believe it would be useful to verify to what extent international law is being violated here, and that we should not make an exception for Israel, nor, in this context, for Palestine when it makes mistakes. At present, we are talking about approximately 21 000 people who live in the area between the wall and Israel and who are being cut off from social amenities, schools and jobs. This will lead to renewed hatred and a new generation of refugees. How do you explain – I am a member of the Palestine delegation – to a group of people in Qalqilya, which was once known as the West Bank’s fruit basket and which is located near a small loophole in the wall, that everything is being closed off on three sides? That they are being cut off from two major water sources and from all the farms that should provide for the area? The town, with 40 000 inhabitants, is accessible via one single Israeli checkpoint. As I see it, something of this nature should be brought before the court. I share the view of all those who have said that the conflict between Israel and Palestine should be solved, but tolerating a wall and waiting until the conflict is over is not the right way to go about it.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, I too would like to very sincerely thank the Court of Auditors for its report and also for the assessment that the Court gave the Committee on Budgetary Control yesterday, in which it stressed once again the much-needed efforts being made at reform. However, I would also like to support what Mr Staes said earlier. I think that if the Court leaves this much room for interpretation in its report, the result will always be critical headlines. For example, the Süddeutsche Zeitung today has 'Over DM 8 billion misspent – Court of Auditors refuses to give Commission discharge – Accusations of sloppy budget management'. This headline relates to a press conference by Mr Friedmann, and I must ask, Mr Karlsson, why Members of the Court of Auditors are making different statements, first in our Committee on Budgetary Control and then apparently to the press. I believe that we urgently need clearer criteria for next year's report by the Court of Auditors. The Commission and the Court really have a duty here. We need objectives in the various sectors, so that the public can genuinely judge where improvements have been made, otherwise the same thing will happen again every year, despite Parliament's endeavours in the direction of reform, based on the Court of Auditors' reports. We give our blessing to these reforms and then headlines like this more or less wipe out the benefit of all these efforts at reform in the public's eyes, because the public then just focuses on the mistakes and does not see the efforts that have been made to really achieve reforms. I therefore implore all of you to consider once again how we can set objectives so that we will be better prepared in terms of media relations next year. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, we have a problem: we are not moving with events. We are here today for the 58 victims of Dover. Like Mrs Terrón, I am also from a country, Spain, in which we unfortunately witness hundreds of deaths and disappearances in the Straits of Gibraltar and the Andalusian coasts. There are outbreaks of violence and xenophobia all over Europe and, while here we are talking about a new globalised economic society and a new information society, we do not realise that organised crime, trafficking in human beings, sexual exploitation and drug-trafficking have also become globalised. All of this is interconnected. That is to say, we are talking about a new form of criminality and human slavery which reminds us of the pre-abolitionist era in the United States. Chinese, Moroccans, Russians and South Americans are transported, extorted and advised by mafias. This is the responsibility of some very important international organisations and there is a desperate need for international cooperation to combat one of the most shameful violations of human rights; international cooperation of European police forces and judges with police and judges in the countries where the migrants come from, who also have responsibility for the problem. If they do not have administrative, judicial or police structures, we will have to cooperate with them so that they may be provided with them. In this regard, the Action Plans which were mentioned by the representative of the Council may have an important role to play and I hope we can debate them in Parliament more transparently than we have up to now. We must go beyond words – as he has also said – because words do not solve the problem. We must give the necessary resources to Europol, so that it can work effectively, and to the Action Plans, so that they can be carried out, to the refugee fund and to our borders, so that they can carry out the corresponding controls, because, unfortunately, without economic resources, nothing can be achieved. Anything else is mere verbiage and preaching.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I would also like to wish Mr Solana every success in this difficult task of creating a Common Foreign and Security Policy which is effective, visible and coherent. I had the opportunity to question him on this subject during his appearance before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy, as to what the political means would be – and I was thinking fundamentally of the Intergovernmental Conference – to make use of the next Intergovernmental Conference to the benefit of the CFSP. At that time, Mr Solana told me that he had not yet finished considering the issue and I would like to know whether he has made any progress in this respect. I would like to know, Mr Solana, what the political, economic and budgetary means are – bearing in mind the principle that “he who pays is in charge”, which you know very well from your time as Secretary-General of NATO – to create a force which can maintain peace and prevent situations as dramatic as those which we have seen recently in the Balkans. You have also spoken this morning of the problem of human rights. In this respect, I would like to know your opinion with regard to relations between the European Union and China, especially in light of the recent trade agreement between that country and the United States. And on the subject of the United States, I would like to ask you two very specific questions. Firstly: What is your opinion of President Clinton’s statement that Turkey should become a Member of the European Union? And secondly: What do you think about the pressure which the United States administration is putting on some European companies – I am referring to the Spanish Sol Meliá chain and other companies such as the Club Méditérranée and the German company LTU – and what measures, in your opinion, should the European Union take? Lastly, Mr President, I would like to ask the High Representative, with regard to our policy and relations regarding Latin America, if you think that the new European Union priorities which have resulted from the Rio Summit would require new resources. I understand that your answer is yes and therefore: What do you feel about the decision of the Council of Ministers which, on the first reading of next year’s budget, has reduced the amounts to a level lower than the amounts for 1996? What will you say in this respect to the Mercosur Ministers with whom I believe you are going to meet next week? Do you think that the new priorities on Latin America have to be dealt with using fewer resources, in opposition to what this Parliament approved in the first reading? IN THE CHAIR: MR MARINHOVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I want to welcome Mr Söderman this morning and to congratulate Mrs Lambert and Mrs Thors for their reports. The reality of our society is that if governments and administrations had their way they would never appoint Petitions Committees or Ombudsmen. By nature they tend to be secretive. They are only there because the citizens and their public representatives demand them and defend them when they are there. Therefore, it is important that we continue to demand that the Ombudsman's office and the Petitions Committee of Parliament are adequately resourced. One way of choking off the effectiveness of the Ombudsman's office and the Petitions Committee is to deny them adequate resources. In Parliament it is disgraceful that the Petitions Committee, the single most important direct contact that the citizen has with this institution and with the other institutions of the European Union, is treated the way it is treated. It does not have adequate secretarial assistance. It is treated abominably in relation to translations, which are down at the bottom of the list. It is simply not good enough. I would appeal to the Commission and to the Council if they were here – they ignore the Petitions Committee, as well as ignoring Parliament – to give the resources that are necessary for these bodies to do their job. The Petitions Committee in particular is an important mechanism of access for the people of Europe. It is important that we ensure that it can do its work effectively. The two most important issues that come before the Petitions Committee are the recognition of people's qualifications to work in other Member States and the environmental impact of construction development. In particular, people are concerned that environment impact studies, which are required under EU law, are treated as having no more worth than the paper they are written on. They are either ignored or they do not address the real issues.

Political group: PSE
A large proportion of the prisoners in Turkish prisons must be regarded as political prisoners. In Turkey, people are also still being convicted on political grounds. I was present myself at a trial on 21 December last year in Djarbakir in south-east Turkey where a Syrian priest was threatened with three years in prison for simply talking about the genocide committed against the Armenians and Assyrians in 1915. This was his only ‘crime’, and for this he was to be convicted. Will the Council demand changes to Turkish criminal law and raise specific cases like this one, involving people being imprisoned on political grounds?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I wish to inform the House of the ban on Som Ràdio in the Balearic Islands. The newly elected government in the Balearic Islands, which belongs to the PP Party, has banned its broadcasts. Som Ràdio was the sole broadcaster using the Catalan language, which is the official language in Majorca, Minorca and Ibiza. A few months ago we talked about the prohibition of the newspaper Egunkaria in the Basque country. The Spanish Government bans newspapers and radio stations whose opinions differ from its own, especially when the issue is that another language, such as Catalan or Basque, is involved. Another example of disgraceful behaviour was the position of the Spanish Government on the European Constitution last Saturday in Brussels, which we find unacceptable and which my party and I are completely against. As you can see, the Spanish Government does not only ban the European Constitution.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, there is a short oral amendment which has been agreed by all signatories of this compromise resolution and reads as follows: in paragraph 2, after the word ‘terrorism’, a new sentence saying: ‘Demands that national governments assume responsibility for additional security costs.’

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I rise to draw your attention to a report broadcast by the BBC last week, about child trafficking between European Union countries and West Africa. This was a most disturbing report and I will send it to your services. On behalf of colleagues in this House who I know are very concerned about these issues, I ask that you raise this subject with the Commission and the Member States and ask whether action can be taken across the European Union to stamp out this appalling abuse of young people from a very deprived part of the world.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am glad the European Parliament and the Council have agreed to make 2001 the European Year of Languages. In a European Union of fifteen Member States, committed to enlargement, with eleven official languages and a multitude of regional languages, it is actually very important to make the citizens of the Union aware of the advantages of understanding and speaking other languages and of the many opportunities that exist for learning to do so. Speaking a language other than one’s mother tongue undoubtedly broadens the mind. So, from primary school and kindergarten, children should be encouraged to start learning languages, as an instrument to raise awareness of cultural diversity. Some European countries, especially the Scandinavian countries, already have very advanced policies in this field and the resulting advantages are evident. This practice needs to be disseminated to the other Member States. Of course, we must ensure that this knowledge is not confined only to the better off in society. Boosting the learning of foreign languages will bring European citizens closer together by giving them the means to communicate, and thus get to know each other and forge the links to make the concept of European citizenship a reality. Opening up to other cultures and finding out about the traditions of our European neighbours are essential ways of combating intolerance and racism engendered by fear of the unknown. At the practical level, it needs to be made clear that the European Year of Languages is in fact a joint European Union/Council of Europe project. To show that, it would be better for the two partners to use an identical logo and slogan. The same concern for visibility and transparency leads me to support the creation of an interactive Internet site so that people can access useful information about the project. I am in favour of people being multilingual, but I am sorry we are not trying to develop the teaching of Esperanto in parallel. It is a language with European roots and easy to understand, but also rich and subtle. As an auxiliary language, it can provide one means, amongst others, of facilitating communication between all European citizens. I therefore regret that it is not mentioned in this proposal.

Political group: PSE
My main reason for supporting this report has to do with the necessarily provisional character of the European automobile industry’s voluntary commitment to improving pedestrians’ and cyclists’ chances of survival in the event of collisions, weighed against the stricter and more solid Community legislation that is on the way and that will replace the voluntary commitment. Although this voluntary agreement being considered between the various automobile manufacturers could be implemented fairly quickly and give rise to practical measures, I nonetheless think that, in the long term, a solid legal basis is the only satisfactory way of protecting pedestrians and cyclists. A framework directive with a precise and realistic timetable seems to me to be the appropriate way of bringing about a genuinely dependable policy on roads. The voluntary agreement does not, for its part, seem capable of offering the guarantees required of a trustworthy road safety policy. In addition to the fact that such an agreement is of no effect if one of the partners decides to withdraw from it and that it suffers from a lack of openness and transparency, it also has the major shortcoming of not being really binding. These are all reasons in favour of a framework directive aimed at introducing a genuine policy to protect pedestrians and cyclists, and all reasons which lead me to support the report in question, inviting the Commission to propose this directive.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I am very critical at this time when we have to decide upon relations between the European Union and Turkey. Even though I voted for the motion, I would like to emphasise certain points which I feel that we should always bear in mind in this situation. Firstly, it is not Europe which has asked to become part of Turkey but Turkey which has asked to join Europe, and Turkey must therefore adapt to and accept the rules which the European Union asks it to respect. Secondly, Turkey is no longer alone against Greece but alone against the European Union. Greece, which is no longer able to defend its rights and interests within our institutions, must be defended by the entire European Union.

Political group: PPE-DE