GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Europe was as lavish with its fine words when apartheid was abolished as it proved to be miserly when it came to economic concessions. This small-minded mentality did not hold sway in the Commission but it did in the short-sighted European governments that allowed their national profit interests to carry more weight than the welfare of the South African people. It has emerged from a recent report by UNCTAD that South Africa’s imports from the European Union are likely to increase more dramatically than exports to this market. In so far as this is the case, the agreement is certainly going to have to be adjusted. We are going to have to keep a very close eye on the actual implementation of the agreement. We must not allow the SADC countries to be disadvantaged by South Africa’s relations with Europe. The same applies here: a good neighbour is worth more than a distant friend. Indeed, South Africa must give impetus to the development of the whole region. Its aggressive expansion in neighbouring countries is doing nothing to further this aim. The balance of trade with neighbouring countries is completely unstable. South Africa exports seven times more than it imports. Just as the European Union has granted Pretoria preferential tariffs, so Pretoria could do the same with its neighbours. After all, economic development is essential if there is to be political stability and peace throughout the region. Notwithstanding our criticism of the European Union’s position, we attach a great deal of importance to the fundamental objective of the agreement, that is the economic development of South Africa and integration into international trade. That is why we support Mrs Kinnock’s recommendation. Mr President, as the saying goes: better some of a pudding than none of a pie.

Political group: ELDR
Thank you, Commissioner, for your reply, which is rather diplomatic and does not fundamentally answer my question. It is often said that in politics what is not possible is false. We all know the Member States’ common position with regard to Cuba; we all know that Cuba is not associated to the European Union by means of an institutional agreement. Let us get to the point. Please tell me, as far as the Commission’s responsibilities are concerned, what budgetary allocations, and for what projects, is the Commission considering in relation to Cuba in this 2000 budget, and what are the estimates for cooperation presented by the Commission in its preliminary draft for 2001. Is it legal or not for Cuba to continue to be an observer, not in the negotiation, but in the future agreement which will enter into force when it is ratified by the Member States? Could Cuba obtain, in this new agreement, the observer status which it has had during the negotiations?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, thank you for welcoming the members of local government who are the very people who will have to implement what we decide here. But first of all, we have to do our work. I would like to point out that the amendments mentioned by Baroness Ludford are still not available in all languages this afternoon. Before we proceed to the vote, would you please get the Sittings Service to establish whether the 24-hour deadline applies here and whether or not we have to defer this until tomorrow? I am not trying to start a debate on this subject now, but I would like you to clarify this once and for all, because there has been a lot of confusion here today.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first, I should like to thank Mrs Klamt for this comprehensive and thorough report. I am glad, too, that the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights has been incorporated into the report. Child sex tourism does not take place only in Europe, but throughout the world. Child sex tourism is a tragic and distressing fact of life and this problem has become worse and more serious in certain regions of the world over recent years. Parliament’s approach to the fight against this evil must therefore go beyond the borders of Europe. In addition to the situation in the Far East, there is also that on the German-Czech border, which is why this problem needs to be clarified in no uncertain terms during accession negotiations. It is important to clarify the legal situation and to dispense with the notion of dual criminality. The law of the offenders’ country of origin must be binding for the purposes of criminal prosecution. Offenders should not imagine themselves to be safe in some law-free zone. It must be possible to punish offenders, even if abuse is not a punishable offence in the country in which it is committed. This problem cannot be solved through national measures. We need a common approach in the European Union and in the Member States, in cooperation with the third countries in question. Children as persons with their own, inviolable rights deserve our special protection, irrespective of the country in which they live. This protection must be guaranteed in both theory and practice. Sufficient funds must be provided to support an effective, victim-orientated fight against this evil. In all the Member States of the European Union, the necessary legislative measures must be taken and the laws harmonised in order to guarantee the protection of children. Last but not least, protection of children as separate personalities with the right to freedom from physical and mental harm must be included in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, much of the United Nations report refers to the role of Zimbabwean interests and gives startling evidence of how the actions of Mugabe's corrupt henchmen impact not just on their own people but also on neighbouring countries such as the Congo. The Mugabe regime is a criminal racket and a major factor of instability, not just in southern Africa but, as the report makes clear, in central Africa as well. The report describes the conflicts fought over minerals, farm produce, land and tax revenues by criminal groups linked to the Zimbabwean armed forces which have, for example, transferred at least five billion dollars' worth of assets from the state mining company in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to companies under its control. It is ridiculous even to think the Zimbabwean government could be asked to investigate its own activities. The report not only provides evidence of the involvement of Mugabe in these activities, but names a numbers of other senior Zimbabweans, four of whom are subject to the EU's restrictive measures but four of whom, to my astonishment, are not. The political, economic and humanitarian crisis in Zimbabwe is worsening with serious implications for the security situation. Two days ago, the United States government issued a travel warning urging United States citizens to consider departure from Zimbabwe. Is it not therefore bewildering to the oppressed people of Zimbabwe that two European governments now seek to delay the renewal and dilute the force of the travel ban and other restrictive measures that the European Union has put in place against the Mugabe regime and which are due to expire on 18 February 2003? Is it not deeply offensive that one European Union government has invited Mugabe to a summit conference in Paris? One reason why our measures have been ineffective so far is that they have not been rigorously enforced and their scope is too narrow. This is not the time to be reducing pressure on the Mugabe regime; instead, international action must be intensified. May I ask the President of the Council and the Commission, in accordance with the clearly expressed wishes of this House over a year or more, to insist that sanctions be renewed unequivocally and that the EU measures be extended to include all of those involved in this racket in Zimbabwe and the Congo. The European Union must be determined and consistent in its tough policy in relation to the Mugabe regime and see this matter through, for the benefit of all Zimbabweans. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Out of respect for the Danish reservation in the legal sphere, the Danish Social Democrats have declined to vote in the final vote concerning the Directive.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by thanking Mr Evans and Mr Mantovani for their work. This is an important report, although it does leave major question marks and give rise to serious doubts in certain areas. This report is a natural full stop to the conclusions reached in the Green Paper, which highlighted the remaining barriers to mobility, mobility which is not, as Mr Mantovani said, simply a question of goods and capital but must indeed be mobility of persons, with all the spiritual, human and cultural wealth which they can take to the different countries and thereby enrich them. Our group – the Group of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party – has tabled amendments which include the category of researchers in the recommendation: we are therefore in favour of including researchers. Moreover, we would stress that, although the proposal is certainly a firm step in the right direction, in our opinion, there are certain gaps which will require us, or rather the Commission, to work on eliminating all the remaining barriers of an administrative, legal, linguistic and cultural, but also financial nature. At the same time, it needs to produce active measures firmly promoting the teaching of at least two Community languages in every country and developing and supporting the cultural and linguistic education of our young – and not-so-young – citizens. This should include the use of new methods and new technologies. We also agree that there is a need to give all those who participate in this mobility system clear, comprehensive information regarding their social security rights. In addition, we agree that direct and indirect taxes such as the tax payable for renewal of residence permits should be abolished immediately. Certainly, as Liberal Democrats, we agree that this mobility system should be extended to include the candidate countries as soon as possible, and we would like to express our regret at the continuing delay in the mutual recognition of qualifications, an issue with which Commissioner Reding is quite familiar and which we know to be very important to her. Commissioner, we call upon you to act incisively within the Commission on this unresolved matter, so that, in full respect for national powers and sovereignty, we will indeed be able to talk of a Europe of peoples, a Europe of citizens, but also a Europe of culture. For if Europe is not a Europe of culture, it will never be Europe!

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I want to thank the Council and Commission for coming in response to Parliament's decision on Monday to have this debate. The food industry in Ireland and now in Europe as a whole is reeling under the impact of the foot-and-mouth catastrophe, but it is wrong to demonise any one country for this outbreak. It is particularly silly for a minister of a state which exports 90% of its produce to do so. It could have happened in any one of our countries, given the intensive subsidy-driven nature of European farming, which involves the constant movement of livestock from farm to farm and indeed from country to country. I am not convinced that partial or reasonable bans on the movement of livestock are an adequate response at this stage in the development of the outbreak. In practice I would have to say that no country is likely to import animals from any country where the disease has been identified – and indeed who would blame them? It has also been repeated that this is not a human health crisis. Also, the farming sector is not the only victim of this crisis. Food industry workers, the tourism industry, sporting events and everyday social life are all victims of the efforts to stop the spread of the disease. While that has been acceptable up to now, we must not dismiss out of hand a review which balances the costs involved in continuing with the current approach and its impact on other key industries and on the freedom of citizens to get on with their lives. Finally, when the anger and recriminations have died down, we must get to grips with a reform of the common agricultural policy. European consumers are now more interested in safe food, food that is produced in an environmentally friendly way, and indeed food at affordable prices. But they are no longer interested in dirt-cheap food, regardless of how it is produced or with hidden unacceptable health risks.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, there is no question in my mind that we all want to see the eradication of hooliganism in football at a European level and globally. However, we must be careful not to do so in a manner that would restrict the enjoyment of the real supporters. The issue must, therefore, be discussed at a European level, and we should guard against becoming embroiled in local discussions on the capacity and safety of specific stadiums, wherever they might be. We must ask ourselves why measures taken in the past have repeatedly failed to create a culture of enjoyment in football for everybody. I welcome the dialogue under way now between the Commission and sports and football clubs on how matters could improve. The people who run the game are the people who, through constructive dialogue, will eventually be able to find answers to the blight of hooliganism and, it must be said, racism affecting this most popular of all sports.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, yesterday’s and this morning’s meetings and the meeting due to be held in the coming days in Brussels are all trial runs for Copenhagen, aimed at defining the European Union’s position before the last sprint to complete negotiations. The ten countries have made considerable progress since last year and will be ready in 2004. I believe that the justifications contained in the report will also be included in the report currently being drawn up by Chairman Brok, and that they will not be very different from what has already been said. I represent a fairly straightforward case – Slovenia – which would actually appear to be pretty representative of other small countries in the sense that, without the hard schooling from Europe, these countries would have been psychologically much, much further away from Europe than they are today. Economic, administrative and political problems and the desire to respect the Copenhagen criteria have placed Slovenia and other countries among those which have recently tackled the various chapters on reconstruction of the administrations and the economy most vigorously. Of course, they need to continue to concentrate on restructuring the economy and they need to improve their insolvency legislation, but, at the same time, I would point out that a large number of experts have been drafted in and that some banks which were completely state-owned have become 76% private in the space of a year. This would appear to be a great achievement. By agreement with the European negotiators, the country has opted to remain a single region, not least to avoid feeling, after Vienna and Belgrade, that it is under the yoke of yet another foreign power. There is a possibility that this may change in 2006, depending on national feeling. The most important thing, however, is to keep the citizens informed, something which has been the subject of much discussion today and which is poorly organised. I feel that more needs to be done in this respect.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is commendable that the international community is apparently serious about reducing debt. Unfortunately, this inspired policy comes too late, far too late. As early as the late eighties, UNICEF stated that the rich obtained the loans in the Third World and the poor were saddled with the debts, and UNICEF was right. According to Oxfam, there are 19 000 children who die daily in the developing countries as a result of the debt burden and as an indirect result, admittedly, of the IMF programmes which require certain countries to cut down their health care expenditure by one third. Is it not mind-boggling that countries sometimes have to spend up to 40% of their budget on paying off debts, which have often been accumulated by irresponsible and avaricious dictators, with the unspoken collaboration of the World Bank and private western banks? Let us learn from past experience. I am in favour of debt reduction but not on a level repayment or unconditional basis. It should feature as part of an integrated and multi-lateral strategy. It must be accompanied by proper management requirements. These requirements must be followed by hard guarantees from the countries involved: guarantees that the funding made available by cancelling debts is used to fight poverty; guarantees that the funding will no longer be used to finance arms deals and other military activities. Mr Da Costa, that is not neo-colonialism in my book. It is making sure that the funds of the European taxpayer are not misused to fund wars – crazy wars – in Africa. Conditionality requires courage and – you will have to forgive me – more courage than the Member States and the Commission have displayed so far.

Political group: PPE-DE
Although we agree with some of the proposals put forward in the report, as well as with some of the good intentions expressed, we abstained overall. The proposals are not in fact based on the aspirations of the young and the less young who, it is claimed, influence many of society’s needs. Everything is designed in accordance with what the report discreetly calls the labour market and its flexibility. Behind these noble sentiments, the aim is to provide industrial groups and capitalist businesses with a workforce that is trained according to their needs. This has nothing to do with a policy that provides all citizens with lifelong learning based on their potential and their aspirations.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I have joined with my British Labour colleagues in the Group in voting against this report. As President of the European Parliament's All Party Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, I naturally have a special interest in the Kreissl-Dörfler report. I support measures to prevent a similar outbreak of foot and mouth disease, as proposed in the report. I reject claims regarding the legality of the cull. Whilst very regrettable, the cull was perceived at the time as the most effective measure to end the outbreak. It is very easy to be wise in hindsight. The approach of the UK Government with respect to the culls was approved by the European Commission. Any report such as this requires accurate information. As, for example, the statistics quoted appear to be contrary to official UK figures, it brings into question the wider points of the report. For this reason, and with reservations as above, I have voted against the report.

Political group: PSE
Although it contains some contradictory and even negative aspects, the report makes significant improvements to the proposal for a directive submitted by the Commission. It accepts some proposals for amendments tabled by our group as well as others, which improve the text and which we shall be supporting. We welcome the fact that it puts forward measures intended to ensure compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, despite the USA’s unacceptable position of refusing to ratify it. Nevertheless, the Commission proposal on the trading of greenhouse gas emissions allowances has not been sufficiently amended and so we abstained from the vote because we do not accept this principle, and we also have reservations about various other proposals for amendments. Obiols i Germà report (A5-299/2002)

Political group: GUE-NGL
I am truly sorry that Parliament voted to support a policy that is very harmful as far as consumers are concerned. In the report now adopted, just a fraction of postal services would be liberalised and no final date has been set for that liberalisation. We Members who were in the minority would have liked the final date of 2007 to have been agreed upon. By that time, more than 17 years will have elapsed since this matter was first discussed at EU level. A fixed date would act as an incentive for the post office to develop and modernise its services and would make planning and market investment easier. Now that Parliament has failed to set a date the imbalance that exists between national post offices will continue, as some markets will be open and some will not. As with other markets, traditional, national frontiers in the postal sector have now lost their meaning. It is impossible to struggle against this inescapable development and, for that reason, we should start to prepare for it as soon as we can.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I believe that, today, we should welcome this debate on the Green Paper and the strategy proposed to us by the Commission on consumer policy. We should welcome it because, with enlargement and, thereby, the extension of the internal market, it is clearly important to improve harmonisation of Community legislation relating to consumers. We are also aware of the role that consumerism plays in the economy, and heaven knows we need it at the moment! Studies have shown, however, that, outside the border areas, European consumers do not know how to make use of the advantages provided by the European Union. Why is this? Quite simply, because they still lack confidence, because they do not always have access to the relevant information on products and services and because they do not always have the means of ascertaining the quality of products or price references, and because, particularly in the event of litigation, they do not know which authority will be competent. All this means, therefore, that consumers do not take advantage of the possibilities offered by Europe and are in need of knowledge and information, although they are fully prepared to act responsibly, respecting ecolabels and suchlike. In order to remedy this, we therefore need to harmonise legislation and establish genuine European consumers’ rights while guaranteeing the flexibility required for application in the Member States. We are therefore in favour of better information for consumers. This should be clear and written in the consumers’ mother tongue so that they can make fully informed choices. Developing a framework strategy for consumers also means ensuring their legal protection, putting an end to disputes relating to unfair practices on the part of companies and protecting the companies themselves too. We therefore agree on a high level of consumer protection and on transparency achieved through associations and we expect a great deal from the Commission. We can guarantee, Commissioner, that we shall be looking over your shoulder to ensure that this consumer policy is followed through.

Political group: PPE-DE
The terrorist attack on the USA gives us an incentive to look at the problem of arms exports in a new light. Having said which, the Titley report, despite containing a number of positive, albeit general, pointers, does not I think, come anywhere near to responding to the demands of the times. It is unacceptable for the European Union to base its code of conduct in arms exports on the criterion of the ‘needs of the European defence industry’, because this negates any substantive measures which might be mentioned. The European Union should move to get the USA, Russia, China and all the other major arms exporters to adopt binding rules of conduct and their unwillingness should not be a reason for the European Union to relax or otherwise fail to act properly. At the same time, we need an observatory at European level, we need records and transparency on arms exports so that we can put an immediate end to the scandalous practice of selling arms to forces of crime and destabilisation which have no hesitation in using terrorism to turn their arms against the European Union and its citizens. This is why I feel that the motion falls short and I did not vote for it.

Political group: GUE-NGL