GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, at the Second International Conference of Women held in Copenhagen in 1910, it was decided that the main demand of the time, that of a woman’s right to vote, should be linked to the women’s question as a whole and that (as also stated in the relevant resolution) Women’s Day must be accorded an international dimension and be thoroughly prepared for. It is also worth noting that International Women’s Day has since been banned in all those countries in which fascism and racism came to power during and between the war years. In 1910, a woman’s right to vote was on the agenda. Today, we are focusing upon the ways in which more women might be able to participate in the decision-making process. Women are no homogenous collective. Women belong to different social classes. Women have different individual needs and interests. Irrespective of where we are and notwithstanding our class, race or religion and whether we stay at home or go out to work, it is nonetheless a fact that, in all areas of society, the structures are such that we are thoroughly subordinate to men (albeit with a few individual exceptions, it is perhaps best to add). In my own country, Sweden, a number of political parties have, in recent years, voluntarily introduced quota allocation by gender as a feature governing the ways in which political assemblies are constituted and run. This has led to an increase in the number of women involved in political decision making which, in turn, has provided opportunities for further research. What happens when more women take an active and equal part in political decision making? What has so far emerged is that the agenda has changed – and when the agenda changes, so too of course do the types of decisions made. When the talk turns to quota allocation by gender, the word “qualifications” also crops up. What is interesting is that the qualifications demanded are rarely defined. It often looks as if men today, as in the past, always have the least defined qualifications. Being a man therefore seems, in itself, to be synonymous with maximum competence. This way of seeing things I consider to be proof of spectacular incompetence on the part of many of today’s decision makers. Earlier this year, we requested, here in this Chamber, that 8 March be made into an international holiday. In anticipation of this request being met, I now want to take the opportunity of wishing all women success with the “Women’s World Marches” which are to begin this spring on International Women’s Day. This is a world-wide activity which will focus upon violence against women and female poverty throughout the world. Finally, I want to say, as Commissioner Patten said when he drew the previous debate to a close, that the ideal police officer would be a black grandmother. We do not have any such officers, but black grandmothers are in fact to be found.

Political group: GUE-NGL
This is a perverse interpretation of ending discrimination. For instance, religious schools could quite properly say to a Roman Catholic for example: we do not want to employ you because you are a gay man or because you are a lesbian. Here we have from the Commission a reinforcement of a hierarchy of oppression. Surely what we should be doing, and I hope you will agree, Commissioner, is engaging the person to do the job on the basis of their capability, and we should not enshrine such bigotry and prejudice, no matter how sincerely held.

Political group: PSE
There is little difference in height between shallow areas of the sea along the coasts, the so-called continental shelf, and low-lying coastal areas. Many of those areas have over the years turned from land into sea or from sea into land, with or without specific human intervention. Thanks to the US President, Mr Bush, and the large oil concerns, these land areas threaten to be turned into sea once again, for as long as artificial global warming persists, the ice caps will continue to melt and sea levels will continue to rise. It is precisely in those low-lying coastal areas that a large proportion of the world population is concentrated and key economic centres located. Not only do eight million Dutch people and two million Flemings stand to lose their residential areas, but so do the people living in the Po plain in Italy, Les Landes in south-western France, and parts of cities including Helsinki, Copenhagen, London, Hamburg, Barcelona, Lisbon and Thessaloniki. In addition to population pockets, coastal areas also boast areas of special natural beauty, such as the étangs on the French coast and the Wadden Sea in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark, which is under continuous threat of being encroached upon by ports and industrial areas. I share the opinion of Mrs McKenna entirely that coastal areas require far better protection than the European Commission proposes.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Over the past decade, the first thought was of building national motorway networks, and then attention turned to building and expanding airports. Only in the last few years have most Member States invested in improving the railways and sometimes inland shipping too. It is a fact that some of these high-speed links are at the expense of improving and maintaining short-distance rail transport. It is uncertain whether expensive goods railways, such as the Betuwelijn in the Netherlands, will actually be used as long as companies retain the freedom to transport their goods by road more cheaply and connecting railway capacity in neighbouring countries is lacking. These investments may be controversial, but it is a fact that an integrated European railway network which crosses borders, mountain ranges and coastal routes at high speed, is still not in existence. Mr Turchi, the rapporteur, is right to conclude that investments in the railways and in inland shipping are lagging behind and that too little progress is being made on the construction of tunnels under the Alps and Pyrenees. In order to end the busy HGV traffic through these mountains and the long deviations which passenger trains have to negotiate, these tunnels must be granted priority. Expanding co-financing to 20% is acceptable for this purpose, but no funding should be claimed from this amount for any other projects. If it were, then there would be nothing left to distribute and the stagnation would simply persist.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Maaten who has produced a distinguished report on a particularly wide-ranging subject. Asia is not only huge in terms of area. It also embraces a range of economic, political and religious differences, which mean that it is particularly challenging to deal with the area in a single report. This has been achieved, however. I shall just highlight a couple of points here. In anticipation of the forthcoming ASEM summit in Copenhagen, it must be crystal clear that there is full support for maintaining and developing relations between the EU, the ASEM countries and Asia as a whole. It is first and foremost a question of supporting the struggle to obtain respect for democracy and human rights in Asia. With regard to the global campaign against terror, it is also important for the EU to forge sound alliances with the Asian countries. More extensive relations between the EU and Asia must also play their part in supporting the market economy and sustainable development and, in that way, promoting a prosperous Asia. Simply take a look at recent history and the examples of Japan and Taiwan and it will quickly be very obvious that democracy, the market economy and respect for human rights are the way forward. I must naturally express my delight at the fact that both China and Taiwan are now members of the World Trade Organisation, or WTO. It is of course gratifying to hear the Commissioner confirm that the EU is to open an office in Taipei within a year. Taiwan is the EU’s eleventh largest trading partner and is therefore a very important partner of the EU. Braving possible accusations from Mr Ford, I regret that Taiwan cannot participate in the ASEM Meeting, for example as an observer. By the same token, I also regret that Taiwan is not a member of the World Health Organisation, or WHO, not even as an observer. In my view, every democracy in the world should have a place in these international institutions. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, as has been mentioned, this important debate is taking place against the background of further crises on the border of Kosovo and Macedonia. First of all, therefore, I have to stress the on-going need for cooperation between NATO and the European Union. The Rapid Reaction Force, the rapid reaction mechanism, and the Civil Peace Corps must be complementary to NATO. Indeed that is stressed in paragraph 8 of the General Affairs Council's comments on international cooperation. As has been mentioned by Minister Lindh, soldiers today carry out peace-making Community activities. The crossover between peace and war activities is now difficult to see. The European Union must be complementary to NATO. I urge the Council of Ministers and the Commission to comment on that point. Tackling the root causes is another problem. Society is seriously destabilised by organised crime. Can the Commission and Ministers stress that they will tackle this across borders through Interpol and with mechanisms such as Scotland Yard's Paedophile Unit? Capacity building is another critical point. When we look at Pristina we see that the hospital is under great stress. Is it not a necessity for the new AIDCO organisation that the Commission has created, which we welcome, to build up the capacity of the medical and educational professions? Local professionals maintain civilian society but under stress, however excellent NGOs may be, surely local professionals, particularly in education and medicine, are vital. I urge the Commission to support those functions. Finally, of course, accountability. I truly believe, and I am sure everyone here does too, that the best of all conflict prevention mechanisms is a fully functioning Parliament. I urge those present to ensure that this Parliament plays its full part, not just in conflict prevention and crisis management, but in ensuring that the Rapid Reaction Force has an ultimate responsibility to this Parliament as well as to national parliaments, the Council of Ministers and the Commission.

Political group: ELDR
President of the Commission, I think that despite all the talk about transparency and openness which our Nordic friends are congratulating themselves on, the Finnish Presidency has managed to obtain, in the conclusions, what the governments actually want: to keep the European Union’s decisions and actions completely free from any interference, not only by Parliament, but also the Commission. Now, I am wondering, President Prodi, how you can be so happy when the Commission is practically being reduced to the role of report-provider on the most varied subjects, and clearly does not have a central role in the decisions or initiatives, in respect of both the Intergovernmental Conference and the CFSP. I am also very surprised that as someone who has been speaking to us since September about the importance of a comprehensive reform and his willingness on this matter with regard to the Council, today you are pleased that a comprehensive agenda has not been drawn up. I would like to express my wish that the Members think carefully before accepting Parliament’s opinion on the opening of the Intergovernmental Conference – which is the only, extremely weak tool we have – and that they try, in all ways possible, to convince the Commission that it is necessary to agree to have clear discussions with the Council and its members – including Italian, Belgian and French members, whose speeches on this subject have been, so to speak, a little modest – in order to take the decisions on the future of the European Union out of the hands of diplomats and national governments. I think that pretending everything is going well, when the choice that has been made goes decidedly in the direction of enlarging the Union without deepening it, is profoundly wrong.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I wish to raise a point about yet another problem with the travel office in Strasbourg. The administration of the European Parliament stipulates in the contract that only vehicles without taxi signs may be used. This appears to contravene French legislation. The French Ministry of the Interior stated in a letter back in 1998 that special rules apply in Strasbourg. For about the last two months, drivers working for the European Parliament have been repeatedly stopped and checked by the police, as was the case on Monday at Strasbourg Airport, while Members of Parliament were sitting on the plane. If we demand that they get an additional vehicle for the travel office just for the week of the part-session – which is now only four days long – then it would seem to me that we have overstepped the mark and are guilty of harassment. I should therefore like to urge you, Mr President, to make representations to the French Ministry of the Interior on the need for a permanent, practicable regulation for the drivers. If, in addition to poor flight connections to and from Strasbourg, further restrictions are imposed on Members via the travel office, Strasbourg will become an even less attractive location.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking Mrs Myller for her report and her ambitious treatment of the directive proposed by the Commission. Even if the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy appears rather as if it had been caught napping and has only just woken up, the fact may, at all events, be conveyed that the problem of acidification is scarcely a new issue. Instead, it has been with us for as long as industrialisation – for 100 years. Research into the question has been going on for 30 years. None of us ought to be in any doubt about what the sources of acidification are, nor about what we should be doing regarding this issue. Some accuse the Commission’s proposal, and also the report, as being excessive and far too costly to implement and say that the calculations that have been made are utopian. This is, however, wrong because we know that the Member States themselves have contributed to the report which serves as a basis for the whole directive. There is more justification for criticising the fact that we have not included the energy scenario we have emphasised elsewhere, for example in the Kyoto protocol, and which involves burning fewer fossil fuels in order also to solve the climate problems we are facing. With all due respect to the Gothenburg protocol – and despite the fact that it has taken its name from my home town – I have to say that it is, in fact, just not on to compare this with the directive which we have to take a decision on tomorrow. One might well wonder why the Commission’s directive appears only a month later, rather like a punishment directed against this UN directive, but that has to do, of course, with nothing other than our own sluggishness in dealing with the issue. If we had been a little quicker off the mark, the present directive would have been on the table – signed, sealed and delivered – long before the so-called Gothenburg Protocol. The word “impossible” has been used about the directive. I should like to say, however, that what is impossible is the situation which we have at present. The impossibility lies, therefore, not in the directive but in the current situation.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the rapporteur correctly maintains that climate change is one of the most serious environmental problems we are facing today. Although three years have already passed since the Kyoto Conference and the commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by 8% in comparison with 1990 levels, and as the European Environment Agency has reminded us, if very specific political measures are not taken, this reduction will not take place; on the contrary, greenhouse gases will increase by 6%. It should be considered that emissions from transport could increase the most rapidly, potentially rising by up to 39% by the year 2010. I also share the rapporteur's concern for specific policies and measures to take priority over emissions trading, which should be ancillary to them. I do not entirely share Mr Liese's faith and enthusiasm regarding nuclear energy. I consider, like the Member who spoke earlier, that nuclear energy poses unresolved problems, and the fact that the Commissioner said nuclear energy will not be promoted in the proposals currently being studied reassured me. In any case, we believe that the priority for the European Union must be specific measures and policies and the definition of a European programme on climate change, which must also have specific objectives and aims, and it worries us that this is not the philosophy that will be advocated at the forthcoming Hague Conference. In conclusion, Mr President, I, like other Members, will recall the floods in Spain and Italy, which seem to us, like other so-called natural disasters, to be an expression of climate change.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, this joint debate is tackling issues which will shortly be at the centre of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Forum. We are all convinced that the future of the Union's Mediterranean strategy depends largely on the success of the Middle East peace policy, which we must be more zealous in supporting even though it is the United States which is at the forefront of this political initiative. The success of the Euro-Mediterranean project and the concrete results of economic cooperation between the European Union and the countries of the area should benefit the peace policy. Moreover, eastwards enlargement, which received fresh impetus from the Nice Summit, must go hand in hand with an equally strong boost for the Mediterranean strategy, which has to evolve. Another boost, including financial support, is therefore needed for the Barcelona Process and the MEDA programmes, particularly the programmes targeting professional training, university exchanges, projects promoting cooperation with the Union's research centres and technology parks, and especially with the cities and regions of Mediterranean Europe. Economic and social progress must also lead to the consolidation of the areas of democracy, but, as has already been stressed, we must not lose sight of the fact that full respect for human rights is essential if the partnership is genuinely to succeed.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner Monti, on the subject of the proposal before us, I should like to make four remarks or observations on behalf of my Group, but not without first congratulating our fellow Member, Mrs Randzio-Plath. First of all, I should like to thank Commissioner Monti for having had the courtesy to consult the European Parliament. A Commission directive has been referred to us, even though, I believe, it is not legally mandatory to consult Parliament, although the subject is clearly a crucial one. This leads me to reiterate the hope that the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference will propose subjecting all legislation on competition policy to the codecision procedure, thereby enabling us legally to work on a more equal footing. My second comment concerns the actual purpose of this proposed directive. It has an extremely specific aim, which is to prevent, subject to monitoring by the Commission, any legitimate public aid to services of general interest being misappropriated to the benefit of activities which are themselves open to competition. Having said that, the problem is by no means easy to solve, as the previous speaker made clear. Indeed he states – and I would be curious to know Mr Monti’s response to this – that Internet connection does not, for example, come under the heading of universal service. I think that this runs quite counter to the objectives of the European Council in Lisbon, and that it is necessary, on the contrary, to have a comprehensive vision of universal service. One might go so far as to imagine, even if this is a matter for subsidiarity, that the Community as such should at least define the minimum standards of what the universal service may be. Otherwise we are heading towards a relatively chaotic situation. Thirdly, I should like to know the Commission’s reaction to Recital No 4 of our report, in which the rapporteur and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs effectively ask the Commission to specify how important it considers services of general interest to be. I await the Commission’s response on the matter. Fourthly and finally, there is one amendment, Amendment No 3, which is explicitly intended to exclude the broadcasting sector from the scope of the proposed directive. I think this amendment is an improvement on the current text. Paragraph 6 is a masterpiece of diplomatic language but is relatively incomprehensible. I should therefore like to see the Commission expressing its support for Amendment No 3 as proposed in plenary.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, may I suggest to you that the adoption of Amendment No 46, does not mean Amendment No 47 falls. In my group’s view, it constitutes a wholly useful complement and is in no way opposed to the wording of Article 46.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am going to follow Mr Colom i Naval’s advice by speaking on the problem of reform, for which I am the permanent rapporteur. This problem is quite fundamental, because we have to reiterate on a regular basis that the European Parliament is firmly in favour of administrative reform of the institutions. The polemics that are currently raging between those with differing views should be less important than the fundamental problems, and the fundamental problem is to make the Union’s action clearer and more effective in meeting the public’s expectations, so that citizens start to trust the European Union again. You know that, in this budget, we noted several delays in implementing this reform, particularly as regards the Commission’s response – which we have yet to receive – on the rewriting of the financial regulation, and also with regard to setting up base management. The report's fundamental concern is with the reform of the status and organisation of a career in European civil service. We had to take a precautionary measure and put funds into the reserve for creating the new positions that were requested. This is nothing more than a precautionary measure, and I would like to reiterate that, for the time being, this is only at the first reading stage as we asked the Commission to provide clarification on the implementation of the single Statute, so that we could have very precise and realistic answers, particularly on the problem of early retirement schemes for civil servants and temporary staff, but also on the problems caused by absenteeism and vacancies. We believe that the Commission will be able to provide us with the answers to all these issues, but, nevertheless, I wanted to draw your attention to the fact that hypothetical positions will not help this reform to move forward. We have 15 countries and seven institutions, but we have only one European Union, for which only one statute is needed. We must not take refuge behind the reports published last year, because the linearity is no longer what it was. We therefore want a clear budgetary framework in order to adopt a position, and I shall repeat the request made by all the Committees of Parliament to the Council: the Council must start talking and give us answers on a regular basis so that all our procedures – and reform, in particular – progress within a framework that is efficient in terms of budget. This reform is vital: it must not just look good on paper, but should also be realistic and applicable over time. Nothing will stop when we reach 2004. Everything must continue. The reform process must provide renewed motivation and must modernise the way we work, but it must retain a European civil service that has one objective: to implement the political plans of the European Union that restore citizens' confidence.

Political group: PSE