GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the Irish Social Democrat, Mr De Rossa, believes that current drugs policy does not work. Will he find the solution in the Netherlands? Is it there that the most helpful models are to be found? Is the Netherlands an example to the rest of Europe? Combating the drugs scourge is far too serious a matter to be left to individuals who are not prepared to take full responsibility on behalf of the present and future generations. My question to many of you in the Group of the and to the majority of you in the Group of the , the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party and the Confederal Group of the is this: what support are you prepared to give to the parents of a teenage girl or boy when she or he tells mum and dad that the politicians, in their wisdom, have decriminalised drugs and that society has nothing against drugs. What support do you offer that teenager’s mother, Mr De Rossa and Mr Evans? What support do you offer his or her father, Mr De Rossa and Mr Evans? What message do you have? Is the Dutch model the modern one? Is this the outward-, forward-looking one? There are so many different concepts floating about. Put yourselves in the shoes of a real family, and imagine the message that is being sent out to the children and teenagers. The attempts to legalise drugs constitute a serious infringement of the UN Convention on Drugs and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, especially Article 33 of the latter. I quote: ‘States Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including legislative, administrative, social and educational measures, to protect children from the illicit use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as defined in the relevant international treaties, and to prevent the use of children in the illicit production and trafficking of such substances’. My question to the rapporteur, Mrs Buitenweg, concerns the way in which she imagines Dutch policy to protect children’s rights and to strengthen the position of Dutch parents in telling their children, both younger and older, to resist drugs, including cannabis. I also wonder in what way the Netherlands is a model for the rest of Europe. Mr Evans also addresses the issue of whether cannabis can be compared with alcohol. Apparently, the message, especially in Great Britain, is that cannabis should become as culturally accepted as alcohol is at present. Does this mean that you want culturally accepted drug use to extend to include cannabis? Not only do Swedish reject this view; but so also, tomorrow, will a majority of Members of the European Parliament.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, High Representative, almost everything has been said today. I would like to welcome the efforts of the Greek Presidency to resolve the situation we find ourselves in. The European Parliament will perhaps adopt a common resolution tomorrow on Iraq, a resolution which I support. But I am appalled that the minimal consensus it reflects, which underlines the central role of the United Nations Security Council, is so timid. Although defence and security are clearly intergovernmental matters, I believe that world peace and stability cannot be restricted to one pillar. You have said, Mr Solana, that the overwhelming majority of Europeans are unambiguously against the war. And we, in this Parliament, in order to safeguard European cohesion and our trans-Atlantic relations, vacillate and pay a high price, that of silence, and at times hypocrisy, since we are pretending to believe certain things. We are pretending to believe that the non-existence of something can be proved. We are pretending to believe that we are fighting terrorism, when there is every indication that we are going to make it infinitely worse. We are pretending to believe that Iraq is a threat to the world, when actually it is a country on its knees. We are pretending to believe that only that country has weapons of mass destruction, when the entire region is a powder keg. We are pretending to believe that the 150 000 men amassed on the borders of Iraq are only there to put pressure on Saddam Hussein. We are pretending to believe, as Mr Poignant has said, that this war does not have a terrible whiff of oil and that Bush’s real objective is to return Iraq to the Iraqis. We are also pretending to believe that democracy can be built by force on a site littered with mines and bombs. And we are pretending to believe that we will never be accomplices in a massacre and that the UN, that arbiter of international law, will play an impartial role and is not subject to horrendous pressures. Mr President, I am ashamed today!

Political group: PSE
Madam President, great importance has been attached to the reform process, which deserves to be acknowledged, although this may be somewhat premature. My question is this: there is a need for reform, due not least to the accession of new countries, and thus to the enlargement of the Union. How can we – the Commission, Parliament and also the national parliaments of the applicant countries – meet this challenge more effectively, taking into account the ideas and considerations of the applicant countries? The delegations are actively engaged – as am I in my delegation for relations with the Czech Republic – but it is clear that there is often a pronounced schoolmasterish tone to our dealings with one another. How can the reform process help make the relationship and cooperation between the European Parliament, the national parliaments and also the Commission, and the work they perform together, more effective?

Political group: GUE-NGL
The process of enlargement which the European Union has started has brought it to a crossroads and its ability to continue making progress will depend on the direction it takes. It can therefore be said that the IGC, which is charged with proceeding with the institutional reforms which will make enlargement possible, holds the future of the European Union in its hands, since it has to decide between the minimal reform laid down in the Treaty of Amsterdam and the broad reform which will allow the Union to accept the countries which are preparing for accession and pursue its task in favour of respect for human rights, peace and social justice. Therefore, given that we are at a crucial moment in the process of European integration, it was appropriate for Parliament to send a message indicating what it understood to be the key points of the reform. In the Dimitrakopoulos-Leinen report which we have just approved and which I have voted in favour of, Parliament indicates that we have to make further progress and that, to this end, we have to give the European Union the necessary means to complete the shared project of peace and well-being initiated 50 years ago. Let us hope that the IGC is aiming sufficiently high for the great challenges facing the Union and that it follows that path which Parliament has set for it.

Political group: PPE-DE
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. – Mr President, Mr Corbett's report is excellent and I am very glad that it has finally found its way here so we can vote on it. Not only will it make our lives easier by shortening our voting times, more importantly, it will make what we do in this House more transparent, more comprehensible to the outside world, because votes would focus on the key issues without taking away the right of minorities to express views. Focusing on the issue of urgencies and the changes proposed by Mr Corbett, I know some Members are concerned at how human rights and topical and urgent items will be dealt with if the present procedure is abolished. What is proposed gives us a much better option. For human rights, the relevant committee – the Committee on Foreign Affairs – would bring forward a resolution on human rights. That means that human rights would be dealt with in exactly the same way as any other important issue in this House, in committee, in a considered manner, rather than rushed through on a Thursday afternoon in Strasbourg when very few Members are here. I hope that we in this House will support this very important proposal and work better on human rights. I have been an MEP for four years and since I have been here there have been constant complaints that there are too many votes, we do not know what we are voting for, there are hundreds of amendments in plenary. If we want to change that, we have to vote on this report and vote for change. Unless we do, there will be no change, we will be back to the status quo and the complaints will continue. Please support the Corbett report.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, Tajikistan is not only the poorest of all the countries formed from the Soviet Union, it has also been the one to suffer the most on account of the turmoil caused by tribal feuding, which ultimately escalated into civil war. The country failed to grasp how to employ the financial aid provided so far in a targeted manner. The situation has only calmed down to some extent over the last few months, once the warring parties had ceased hostilities and resolved that their next step would be to form a coalition government. General free elections are set for March 2000. The international donor community, which includes Swiss organisations for the most part, is now prepared to carry on where it left off delivering financial aid, but with certain provisos. Now that the situation has abated and there are more favourable prospects for future progress overall, the Savary report now attempts to provide renewed support for the macroeconomic financial aid for this country in the form of loans. We hope that this will make it sufficiently clear to Tajikistan that it needs to improve its state machinery by embracing democratic development and undertaking the necessary reforms. However, the financial aid in the form of loans should only be granted if there is a real possibility of the European Union being able to properly monitor the situation, if the process of national reconciliation continues and the elections, in particular the parliamentary elections set for March, are free and democratic. As Mr Savary rightly said, this is also what we aim to achieve with proposed Amendments Nos 8 and 9, to which we give our unequivocal support. If Tajikistan’s creditworthiness is to be restored, then the proposal in Budget 2000 is also to be welcomed. The rapporteur, Mr Bourlanges, has just confirmed to me that as far as this is concerned, a commentary is to provide for a particular form of financial aid to be made available again under the TACIS programme. On a final note, I would like to say that the PPE group supports this report notwithstanding all the associated risks. It represents a renewed, hopefully successful attempt to resume and promote economic and technical cooperation with Tajikistan.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Commission has presented a proposal for a regulation on cooperation with the countries of Asia and Latin America. The duration is for an indefinite period, although the Financial Framework is defined for the period 2003-2006. This proposal provides for a general increase in cooperation with these regions and emphasises common rules and procedures to be followed, such as implementing procedures and decision-making processes. This is a text that gives the Commission a high degree of flexibility because it does not contain political or operational guidelines. As regards available funds, the Commission suggests a financial framework for 2003 to 2006, which would be divided up at a ratio of 60% for Asia and 40% for Latin America, totalling EUR 3.793 billion. As draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Budgets, I tabled some amendments that I believe are crucial. Despite the fact that the budget’s heading IV ‘External and Development Policy’ faces great financial constraint, I believe that the sums put forward by the Commission are compatible with the financial limit. I nevertheless made a point of insisting on the necessary improvement in implementing cooperation, specifically in translating the promised appropriations into actual payments for these regions. For these two regions, the problem of outstanding commitments (RAL) stands at EUR 3.45 billion. I also proposed rounding up the total amount to EUR 3.8 billion in order to take account of the fact that the 2003 budget was in the meantime adopted at a level higher than that proposed by the Commission. Lastly, I suggested that, from the budgetary point of view, it would be preferable not to introduce sub-limits for the two regions, which limits flexibility. Instead, the regulation should have an overall financial framework. It is, therefore, crucial that the European Union contributes to eradicating poverty, to promoting sustainable development and to ensuring respect for human rights, minority rights and the rights of indigenous people, and contributes to democracy, good governance and to combating inequalities. I also wish to state that the Committee on Budgets voted in favour of setting up a solidarity fund for this region, which I believe will prove to be an extremely positive initiative.

Political group: PPE-DE
Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the context of this debate, I should like to ask you two urgent questions in connection with the reorganisation at Ford and, more specifically, the collective dismissal of about 3 000 workers in Genk. I do not think that I have to convince anyone of the fact that this is a real tragedy, not only for the people at Ford Genk, but also for the suppliers and for the region as a whole. However, Commissioner, the way in which this reorganisation is being managed is shocking, and in my view, contravenes European rules. The fact is that Ford has been in breach of contract on two occasions, the first time by failing to comply with the collective labour agreements that were concluded with the workers in 2002, and in which investments were planned. The second case, Commissioner, is, however, for Europe to deal with, as it has to do with a failure to consult the European Works Council in this matter. The reorganisation at Ford is clearly a European matter, because the cancellation of investments at Ford Genk has repercussions for two other establishments in Germany. Moreover, jobs have also been scrapped in Cologne and the Jaguar factory in Barnsley is being closed down. This clearly illustrates, therefore, that this reorganisation is a European matter that should be dealt with by the European works council. However, as it happens, Commissioner, the works council was not consulted in this matter. Ford is deliberately entering into negotiations on a company-by-company basis. This, in my view, clearly contravenes legislation concerning the European works council for which we voted here in 1994. After all, no attempt whatsoever is currently being made to find a solution for this reorganisation at European level. As my fellow MEPs have already pointed out, this could have yielded alternative solutions, for example, by spreading the work among various people in, for example, the framework of a shorter working week. My first question to the Commission is whether it intends, on the basis of European legislation on European works councils, to require that the Ford management start negotiations within a European framework at this stage. A second question on this subject, Commissioner, concerns the following. The regulation concerning Ford's European works council is apparently based on the notorious Article 13, the so-called voluntary agreements, to which the directive and annex with minimum provisions do not apply. Would this not yet again constitute a reason for the Commission to impose these famous minimum rules on all agreements concerning European works councils?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, despite your final statement, which we would like to be of consequence but we fear will be otherwise, the criticisms made a while ago by this Assembly regarding the current Intergovernmental Conference have proven to be justified. Firstly, with regard to the method, which is a tired, lifeless procedure according to public opinion, which in fact marginalises the other institutions of the European Union and in which governments are victims of their own labyrinth. Second, with regard to an inadequate agenda, which has left out issues that are particularly relevant to the future of the European Union and its citizens’ interests. In spite of everything, however, at least the agenda has included one very important point, reinforced cooperation, which must be seen as an incentive for progress and not for dispersal or creating cabinets. We must ask for maximum progress to be made in this field in a coherent manner – as indicated in Mr Gil-Robles Gil-Delgado’s excellent report – seeing reinforced cooperation as a last resort that would make it possible in all areas in which decisions are not taken by a qualified majority and also with regard to the CFSP and defence, for the permanence of the single institutional framework to be guaranteed, for a sufficient critical mass of countries to take part in it and, of course, for it to be open at all times. This will help to stimulate European construction beyond this IGC and possibly in spite of this IGC. In order to achieve this objective we must ask the Nice Council to open up the important reformist approach that can bring together political consensus and public support. I am referring to a constituent process of the European Union that would form a new stage – as proposed in the Duhamel report – first by simplifying the treaties and then through a new political instrument creating a system to put an end to the democratic deficit within the European Union. This would be a system of government in keeping with those we use to run our national affairs, beginning with the separation of powers and other principles of the rule of law. We need a constitution for the European Union, and this constitution must start right now by including the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the new Treaty in Nice.

Political group: PSE
We have voted against Amendment No 7 to the report on the EU’s draft general budget for 2002, tabled by Jens-Peter Bonde on behalf of the Group for a Europe of Democracies and Diversities. As it stands, the draft is of no use at all in securing a better arrangement for MEPs’ travel expenses. It is also our view that MEPs’ travel expenses are a subject to be dealt with in connection with a reform of the Statute for Members.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I voted as representative of the Pensioners’ Party for this measure on the evaluation of fishing programmes as well. It is right for there to be penalties for those who do not implement the guidelines, but I must also say that, following my speech in this House regarding the explanation of vote on Friday 17 December 1999, that is, last century, the fish got wind of this and, in writing – because as we all know, they cannot talk – said to me: “Well done, you spoke up for us! Speak up again for us young fish, especially seeing as you are a young fish yourself, but also speak up for the elderly fish who would like to live longer and who are therefore in favour of limiting fishing where the guidelines are breached.” They also asked me – but I will do this another time – to put forward their proposals on fishing nets so that they can live longer and become pensioners as well.

Political group: PPE-DE
We hope that Hong Kong will not adopt the Chinese system of general rules that permit the completely arbitrary persecution of political opponents. Like Mrs Malmström, we particularly fear for Falun Gong supporters, whose peaceful protest does not justify persecution in any form. Hong Kong must be allowed to remain what it is, in the expectation that China will also go down the road to democracy and human rights. Only on this basis can we maintain the dialogue and the cooperation. When I visited China along with some members of our Group of the , I noticed the extent to which the Hong Kong economic model was held up as an example to the big cities on the Chinese mainland. Yet the concept of ‘one country, two systems’ still applies in the areas of human rights, democracy and freedom of speech. In that regard, Hong Kong still to this day remains a unique phenomenon in the Chinese sphere of influence. Many people in China told us that developments towards greater democratisation and human rights could be expected in the future. We therefore view with the greatest concern the creation of the law to combat subversive activities in Hong Kong. We fear that this will be at the expense of freedom of speech, the objective administration of justice, religious and artistic freedom, scientific freedom and so on. This would be precisely the opposite of what we have always hoped for, which is that one large area of democracy and human rights will be allowed to come into existence.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon's recent remark that he regrets not having killed Yasser Arafat in Lebanon in 1982 is unforgivable. But I suppose we should not be surprised: Mr Sharon's own terrorist behaviour in Lebanon, when he permitted the massacres in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, was subsequently condemned by Israel's Kahane Commission of Inquiry. Given this fact, it is regrettable that he was subsequently elected as Prime Minster of Israel, this being the root of many of the current problems. Current Israeli policy is ludicrous and counterproductive. How can they make demands on Arafat to behave as if he was the leader of a normal state, while at one and the same time they make him a virtual prisoner in his own home, destroy his airport and his broadcasting station and humiliate him? Who do they want to replace him with? In the post-11 September situation, the European Union has been oversensitive in its approach to the Middle East. We are indeed an honest broker and we should be vigorous in that approach. The fact that the Americans are indebted to us for the solidarity and the support that we provided when they needed it should mean that we are entitled to a reciprocal response from them. And instead of being the puppet of Israel, they should join with us in an even-handed policy approach to the tragedy in the Middle East. If that is not forthcoming, then we should act on our own. It is frustrating that the United States through its present stance is becoming much more part of the problem than part of the solution.

Political group: PPE-DE