GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, we are here once again – this is not the first time, unfortunately – to discuss a very serious problem: the redundancies of thousands of workers due to the unilateral choices of a firm. And the Michelin case, which I do not want to talk about in detail because other speakers have already done so, gives us the opportunity for this debate. In many Member States – as recent history reminds us – there have been cases of restructuring: indeed, history is full of cases of restructuring, relocations and firm closures – Mr Wurtz reminded us of some – which not only reduce employment, but jeopardise the economic and social cohesion of affected areas, create a climate of social insecurity among workers and create a climate which certainly does not encourage development and growth. The requirement for greater competitiveness of firms, especially in the era of globalisation of the economy must, however, be able to combine the necessary flexibility within companies with the security of workers. These processes, these phenomena which are becoming increasingly more frequent, must be regulated using the instruments available and these must be improved. Commissioner Diamantopoulou, whom I would like to thank for the clarity of her statement, spoke of intelligent restructuring. The existing instruments for prevention and management of the phenomena must be used both at national and European level, because job losses, Mr Pronk, concern Europe. They do not only concern individual countries, but all of us. In particular, the case we are discussing today should give the Commission the chance to pledge today, before the European Parliament, that it will make an assessment, a revision of the Directive on redundancies and the closure of companies to make it more effective in terms of protecting jobs. Moreover, we need to speed up the re-examination of the Works Council Directive, strengthening information processes and consultation in particular but, I would add, we must also include in that directive the fundamental issue of sanctions. Rules must be obeyed, and those who do not obey them must pay the price.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I think it would be useful if we concerned ourselves with the Caucasus, possibly with permanent observers and little rhetoric. This historical moment is pushing us towards regional cooperation even in destabilised areas and towards perhaps unforeseen alliances in the interests of greater stability. If I wished to make a point about the resolution, it would be this: the three countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia – perhaps should not always be treated like Siamese triplets: their recent histories differ, their problems differ and their efforts to build a genuinely democratic system differ. It would be unfair if any of the three had to wait until the others caught up in the democratisation process. In this context it would, of course, also be necessary to analyse what the West and the major countries have done in such regions and to analyse, for instance, whether the ethnic revolts in Georgia are local or led from outside, and if so by whom. I would then like to know why we hear so little about the Minsk Group, founded to seek a compromise between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Is it still meeting? Even that is not clear. The European Union should develop a political role that is more obviously adventurous and daring in the region, as the document states – this is the main message – beyond the conference of the three Southern Caucasus states and the European Union. Given the situation, however, a discrete presence of Russia and America might be considered somewhat useful for a proper balance.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I am glad that this report has been adopted. The report by Michl Ebner from the South Tyrol is successor to a long line of great reports adopted by this House on this subject since the 1980s, beginning with the Arfé Report, produced by a great Social Democrat from the Valle d’Aosta. I rejoice in it. It was the eastward enlargement that made it necessary to send out a clear signal concerning these matters, for a very large number of minorities and ethnic groups will be finding their way to us: Hungarians in Slovakia, Germans and Poles in the Czech Republic, Poles in Lithuania, Lithuanians in Poland, and so on. Taken together, members of the minorities will, numerically speaking, be the second largest Member State in the enlarged EU, after Germany but before France. That shows the immensity of this issue in quantitative terms, and even in qualitative terms it is of great significance, as these minorities can become either the mortar in the foundations of the EU or an explosive charge. We want them to be the mortar that holds us together.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mrs Ahern is a much-respected fellow Member of this House and I hold her in high esteem. Sadly, at the end of her intervention she referred to the nuclear package as nonsense. That amounts to condemning as totally worthless the work undertaken by the Commission. By implication, Mrs Ahern also condemned as totally worthless the work undertaken in good faith by the rapporteurs with a view to improving on the Commission’s proposal. All this work was dismissed as nonsense. In my view, Mr President, nonsense is an unduly pejorative word to use. I would never resort to it to describe Mrs Ahern’s views and opinions. I would certainly refrain from referring to them as nonsense. I might say they were mistaken, lacking in rigour or unrealistic, but I would never dismiss them as nonsense. For the sake of my personal regard for Mrs Ahern, and in the interests of parliamentary courtesy, I therefore call on Mrs Ahern to withdraw the word nonsense. As I said, I believe it is unduly derogatory.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this directive is important for the EU in terms of the environment, energy production and competitiveness. Up-to-date limit values for large power plants are needed both in the Member States and the candidate countries. For that reason, we must thank the rapporteur, Mrs Oomen-Ruijten, sincerely for her hard work. The committee is imposing substantially stricter limits with no adequate differentiation being made with regard to their size and type. The one-off investments in new technology the directive calls for are the same irrespective of the size of the plant. This would particularly threaten the ecologically recognised combined production of heat and power. In my own country, for example, this might mean a step backwards in ecological terms. In Finland many different bodies share this concern, among others the Ministry of the Environment. The amendments tabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy would mean investments that were not cost-effective in terms of ecological benefit, and difficulties for the combined use of energy-efficient wood and peat and the combined production of power and heat. The latter process is carried out mainly in medium-size plants, which would now be treated in the same way as the large ones. On the other hand, the use of peat is justified. It promotes the added use of wood in power plants, as combined combustion improves the way the combustion process can be controlled, reduces problems of corrosion, and adds to the reliability of fuel being available. The report does not support this objective either, one which is directly linked to the matter of bio-fuels. It might even be said that the report could be accused of environmental avarice in some of the amendments and that it is therefore in danger of stifling many important environmental objectives. However, it is important that the report should be adopted and the directive be brought into effect, as it will prevent emissions from drifting long distances and acid deposits affecting the natural environment of another Member State. With its amendments, in search of compromise as they are, my own group is trying, among other things, to ensure that the combined production of heat and power in small and medium-sized power plants can continue, while the large plants are compelled to invest in technology that can adhere to stricter limit values. In addition, the compromises seek to ensure that burning peat, which contains very little sulphur, does not require needless extra investment, as opposed to processes using fuels with a higher sulphur content. This is contained in Amendment No 36. We appreciate it very much that Mrs Oomen-Ruijten has agreed to these compromises. We find ourselves once again in a situation where a legislator has to face the fact that different environmental conditions also mean different environmental effects. Unless we can find the right solutions to these problems, our last resort may have to be to have our own directive for fuels within the context of the northern dimension, although this would not be a very good solution.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we live in a world where the better our neighbours and our other fellow human beings thrive, the better we also thrive. That is why it is important to cultivate a policy that strengthens democracy and prosperity in the Union’s neighbouring regions. When Finland joined the European Union the Union suddenly had Russia as its neighbour, sharing a border with that country which is almost 1 300 kilometres long. That border still represents one of the world’s widest gulfs between standards of living. Despite development, Russia still has much hard work to do in the creation of democratic social structures. The strengthening of democracy and civil society also remains a fundamental aim of cooperation between the EU and Russia. Enlargement means that, in addition to the border between Finland and Russia, the Union will be getting 10 new Interreg-TACIS borders. It will no longer be possible to maintain the current system of cooperation, but the experience we have had up till now of cooperation should be put to careful use. The new Member States will bring with them Belarus, Ukraine and Moldava as neighbours. Each of them has significant political and economic problems. If they get worse they could increase instability in Europe. The situation is worst in Belarus, where the political situation has hindered EU cooperation with the country. Hopefully preparations for the elections in 2004 will clear the way for what would at least be the first openings for cooperation. The Commission communication quite rightly stresses the importance of cross-border and regional cooperation with our new neighbours. A new financial instrument must be developed for cooperation. It should, in my opinion, be based on the Interreg principles and be flexible enough to meet the needs of each border region. The key principles are that it should be multiannual, that there should be power of decision in the regions, and that it should be organised as efficiently as possible with regard to its administration and making payments. It is also important that expertise and cultural know-how in the new Member States of the EU should be swiftly harnessed in the planning and implementation of policy towards our neighbours.

Political group: PSE
I approve the accession of the Czech Republic because I take the view that the reunification of Europe and thus also the return of the Czechs to the European family must not be halted by the irresponsibility of those Czech politicians who have still not yet grasped how a modern state functions under the rule of law. It is to be hoped that the lasting injustice of certain of the Beneš decrees continuing in existence will be able to be done away with more speedily within the EU than if we refuse to admit the Czech Republic to it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, in item 21 of the report we demand a proposal from the Commission ‘during summer 2002’. Since summer has already gone, I want to change this to ‘no later than the end of 2002’.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we find ourselves gazing with bewilderment at each new act by the Milosevic regime, acts against its own people. Today, no one is safe from attack, whether he belongs to the majority or the minority in Yugoslavia. That is why I think it is important to maintain constant contact with the opposition and to attempt to bring about a change in the political scene. I also believe that it is absolutely right that the Commission also wishes to make a relatively large amount of money available if these changes should come about; many people regard such a large amount as being quite appropriate in view of the requirements. I hope that the Commission and Parliament will remain resolute in facing up to the Council, which is taking a rather softer line here. I also believe that funding for increased information provision should be implemented here and now, so as to provide more objective information about the actual conditions in the Balkans. The situation in Kosovo today is different. Whereas before it was the majority that was in great danger, now it is the minorities who are living in difficult circumstances. This is just as unacceptable as the previous situation was. We are unanimous in advocating the rights of all the people living both in this region and in other regions, so that they can live their lives freely and move about at will. Against this background, I am sceptical to say the least about the elections and their results. At the very least we should see these for what they are – an election decided by the Albanians, that is by that predominant part of the population which can move freely within this region. This does not apply to Serbs living in Kosovo, nor indeed to those Serbs who have fled Kosovo and are now living in Yugoslavia. However, the really critical issue – and I urge the Commission and the Council to really knuckle down to things here – is that more police and greater rule of law are needed. We are responsible for the rule of law applying to everyone in Kosovo on a uniform basis.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I would firstly like to compliment you on the fact that you have kept your word and that, during this first part-session of the new year, the number of television channels in our offices has indeed increased considerably. But, Madam President, my personal request has not been met. Although there are now two Finnish channels and one Portuguese one, there is still no Dutch channel, which is what I had requested because Dutch people here like to be able to follow the news too when we are sent to this place of exile every month. I would therefore once more ask you to ensure that we get a Dutch channel as well.

Political group: ELDR
I would like to thank Mr Danielsson for his reply, which was, strictly speaking, legally and politically correct. However, I believe we must realise that, despite Parliament being sparsely populated, much of the general public across Europe is asking these questions following the election results in Italy. According to the Treaty of Amsterdam, the EU is a union of common values, as set out in Articles 6 and 7. Even if the Swedish Presidency does not take up the issue of the formation of the new government in Italy and the conclusions drawn from previous action against Austria, I still believe that there will be various public demands which will force scrutiny of what has happened in Italy and the parties and values of the country. Let me say the following: Is it not the case that what has happened in Italy is due to it being a large country and that in Austria to it being a small country?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on the last occasion we met I raised a question about the Scotch whisky industry which was of considerable public concern. You very kindly, on behalf of the House, took it up with Commissioner Byrne, who is fortuitously here present. I am glad to report that the Scotch Whisky Association has reached a consensual settlement of that difficult question for the time being. I hope that it will be possible for the whole matter to be resolved through satisfactory industry standards. The attention that this House and other public bodies paid to this matter was instrumental in reaching a solution, so I thank you and encourage you all to celebrate the New Year of 2004 with an appropriate beverage! (Laughter and applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
There is no doubt, Mr President, that with the tabling of this report, too, the public’s awareness of the importance of the topic of civil and human rights shows that we have taken another step forwards. We have been considering, over the course of recent months and years, Article 6 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the reaffirmation of the importance and role in the European Union of the principles of freedom, democracy and respect for human rights, and also the creation of the International Criminal Court and the need we all feel to give greater authority to Article 7 of the UN Charter in order to guarantee respect for human rights, eliminating any humanitarian intervention from rationales which are not based purely and simply on respect for these rights: all of this tells us that a great deal of progress has been made. Nevertheless, fifty years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we know that no rights are won all in one go and once and for all: I am thinking of Tibet, Burma, Timor and Asian countries where child and women workers are exploited; I am thinking of Kosovo, Chechnya and Africa, a continent that is too often far away and forgotten; I am thinking of the 790 million people in the world who are suffering from hunger or the 300 million children who have to work; I am thinking of the 1625 executions carried out last year in the 72 countries whose legal systems still provide for capital punishment. Finally, I am also thinking of the fate of the Kurdish leader, Mr Öçalan, whose life has to be saved, I truly believe, through all of our efforts. The very fact that capital punishment is so widespread is one of the most intolerable breaches of each individual’s dignity and right to life: a breach which we feel deeply and which we want to fight, for example, by pointing out that the actual enlargement process of the Union is proving to be not just a factor of peace and security for the continent, but also the way to make applicant states overcome such barbarity. We know that it will be a long and difficult process; this was shown by the UN’s failure to debate the European Union resolution on the moratorium on capital punishment. It was a serious and painful setback, and it is up to us, Members of Parliament, and the Commission, not to let this commitment lie: on the contrary, we must take it up with renewed vigour. Mr President, at the moment, in the United States, in Virginia, the life of a young Italo-American who has been condemned to die but continues to declare his innocence is just one of the many lives which must be saved. I am taking this opportunity to ask you, the President of Parliament, the President of the Council and the Commission, to take urgent action in making an appeal to the United States to suspend the execution of Derek Rocco Barnabei, because the battle against capital punishment is a battle for civilisation which must be fought every time it is necessary and in every way possible.

Political group: PSE
Starting from the premise that the single European currency is an essential and symbolic factor in the process of creating a European identity, whilst recognising that every Community citizen, including those who live either in countries which have not joined monetary union, or in applicant countries, will be significantly affected by the introduction of euro notes and coins, the rapporteur, in the follow-up to the Commission proposal, supports an information campaign with a view to increasing the confidence of the European public in the euro and to guaranteeing that the euro has a trouble-free introduction on 1 January 2002. With regard to banking, the rapporteur proposes that the Commission should intensify its actions with a view to “preventing high bank charges for cross-border financial transfers and high costs of conversion in the euro area”. Throughout the report, however, on various occasions, the technical information that is necessary to enable the public and businesses, particularly SMEs, to adapt to the new currency is confused with propaganda campaigns on economic and monetary union. This is something that we should not support. The rapporteur describes women, for example, as a target group to which particular attention should be paid, through women’s organisations and magazines, since women still have considerable reservations about the introduction of the euro.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, unfortunately I have to report that my efforts to reach a compromise that might also have met with agreement in the Council have failed. I must therefore unfortunately distance myself from the outcome of the vote and ask my fellow Members to vote against the report. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I congratulate Mr Ferber on his report although we have some concerns that it does not go far enough. We believe in the need for liberalisation, competition and value for money. It is iniquitous that the Royal Mail in Britain is using taxpayers' money to intervene in continental liberalised markets whilst at the same time fighting to prevent that liberalisation in the United Kingdom. That is why I have re-tabled some of the amendments which we discussed in committee and which we will be voting for – especially in relation to the liberalisation of direct mail. That is essential for the development of the direct marketing industry. We have concerns, also, about the increase back to 150 grammes from the 50 grammes that we believe is necessary. We have, alongside this, an absolute commitment to the universal service obligation. If it can be done in rural Sweden then it can be done in rural Britain without any great difficulties. I do not take any lessons from the Labour Party about the rural areas. When I was the Minister for the Environment in Britain I was responsible for producing a rural White Paper, which dealt with some of the problems relating to rural post offices, so I do not take messages from the Labour Party, however nicely spoken by Mr Simpson. I am also glad to see that our continental Liberal friends are giving the lead to British Liberals. British Conservatives support Commissioner Bolkestein and we intend to consider, in the course of this debate – and subsequently as the debate proceeds and as the amendments are considered – whether we will vote against the further compromise, however much I respect and regard Mr Ferber's report as a compromise in the face of many difficulties. But, because we believe that Commissioner Bolkestein's original operation is much the best, we may well decide to vote against the further compromise in order to maintain those original proposals. It remains yet to be seen. We should consider it at the end of the debate. IN THE CHAIR: MR COLOM I NAVALVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE