GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I wish to congratulate Mr Cashman on the report he has presented, which won the unanimous support of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. As Mr Cashman stated, and as Commissioner Bolkestein reiterated, the fundamental logic of freedom of movement will make the need to adopt rules in these areas increasingly pressing, because the free movement of citizens within Community territory will multiply the number of cases that we are seeing today and which warrant our attention. In fact, it is incomprehensible that the death of a Community citizen in a Member State other than his or her country of origin results in much more complex procedures, a longer period of time before burial or cremation takes place, and higher costs. This clearly runs counter to the Community approach. This being the case, measures must be adopted to simplify or even harmonise the process of repatriating the mortal remains of persons who have died so as to bring this process more into line with the Community approach which is not, of course, taken into account in the international agreements governing this field. These are the 1937 Berlin agreement and the 1973 Strasbourg agreement which, because they are quite old, are not relevant to the situation we have in Europe today and have therefore become largely obsolete. Furthermore, these agreements established a form of indirect discrimination because they apply essentially to ‘non nationals’, which contravenes the fundamental principle of non-discrimination enshrined in Community law, thereby breaching essential rules of Community law. It consequently falls to the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to ensure that these are compatible and to adopt the necessary measures to guaranteeing that they are complied with. Lastly, it should be pointed out that not all Member States have ratified these agreements, which is another reason for the unacceptable disparity in the measures adopted by each of the Member States.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the tragedy at Dover was one of the most appalling incidents that anyone here can recall. A tragedy for the people involved, a tragedy for their family and friends, but also a tragedy for Europe and the European ideal. As a European Parliament, we must do everything we can to prevent a recurrence. This appalling incident was avoidable. Mr Cappato spoke a few moments ago about the controls at Dover. But the authorities in Zeebrugge knew that the lorry in question was suspect. They had never heard of the company on the side of the lorry and the driver paid cash for the ferry. Accordingly, they alerted the port authorities at Dover. Had they checked the vehicle in Belgium some of these lives could certainly have been saved. I thank the Minister for his genuine and honest statement. He spoke about the real culprits, the organizers. And of course he is right that we must fight organized crime and global trafficking, but identifying the culprits is only part of the battle. We must do more to support the countries from which these people came and improve the conditions there. Can we here in Strasbourg even begin to contemplate the misery and desperation that drove those Chinese people to spend months travelling in clandestine fashion halfway across the world? And their prospects? Probably to work in Chinese restaurants satisfying Westerners' desire for Chinese food. But to do this they died a tragic and desperate death because as Europeans we failed to come up with common and workable procedures for asylum and immigration and that must be on all our consciences.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, my congratulations and thanks to the rapporteur. First of all, no-one here this evening should claim that budgetisation is a silver bullet for the ACP for the delivery of the EDF. However, at the outset we should say that budgetisation would mean that we would no longer stash away hundreds of millions of euro, as has happened under the EDF – money meant for countries which for various reasons were not efficient spenders. It is the case that we should not underestimate, as Mrs Sandbæk has said, the ACP's concerns, but it is wrong for Mrs Sandbæk to say that there is no dialogue on budgetisation. It is happening, the ACP are preparing documents and there is clear discussion going on. For some of the issues that have been raised, guarantees must be offered that resource levels for the ACP will be maintained and increased, and that means a five-year financial framework has to be jointly agreed with the ACP. We can fairly assume now that there is agreement between Parliament, the Commission and the ACP that there has to be ring-fencing over a five-year financial framework. The suggestion I made some time ago that we should have a sub-heading has not found favour. We might still choose to push that with the Commission, but certainly ring-fencing is something that is agreed. I believe that as things stand the ACP can now hold its own in the budgets on the basis that it is by no means the worst-performing region that we deal with under external relations. It is quite condescending to presume or to suggest that the ACP could not manage that relationship under the budgets. Concerns are raised about multiannual funding of projects. Currently under the budget the so-called sunset clause applies and there will undoubtedly be pressure on the ACP to complete over a three-year timescale. But I personally have no difficulty with a three-year timescale. Very often I have been more worried than I like to say about projects which have ceased to be effective, which needed to be terminated and closed down, so a three-year period is something that we can work with quite easily. The ACP is concerned about how co-management will be effective and about the role of the NAOs. It seems to me that the main priority for the ACP is not just about how they maintain administration of ACP aid, but how they maintain ownership of their own priorities and their own development strategies. There should be no fundamental problem with the Commission delegation signing contracts – why should that be a problem, because that would certainly speed up the process? I have seen far too many NAOs drowning under tenders and contracts. Far better for them to have the wherewithal to deal with development priorities. Finally, the principles of partnership are at the heart of the Cotonou Agreement. We want the ACP to be the centre of the dialogue and, as others have said, the Joint Parliamentary Assembly has an important role to play and assists us in focusing the Commission's mind on the views of the ACP and of ACP parliamentarians.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to table an oral amendment: I propose to replace the clause “the European Data Protection Supervisor is bound by the objective of Regulation No 1049” with the clause “the European Data Protection Supervisor is bound by Community law, including Regulation 1049”, and to replace the clause “and by the provisions of the Treaty stating that decision-making in the Union shall be as open as possible” with “and by the provisions of the Treaty relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms and stating that decision-making in the Union shall be as open as possible”. I hope there are no objections to this. (Parliament accepted the oral amendment) *** Before the vote on the legislative resolution:

Political group: PSE
Mr President, anyone who follows this debate will see that there is a kind of war going on between those who are trying to protect health and those who defend tobacco. However, as Mrs Grossetête has pointed out, the problem stems from the fact that legal arguments have been given and that, by a small majority, the Committee on Legal Affairs decided that Article 95 was not the appropriate legal basis. As a Socialist member and spokesperson in the Legal Affairs Committee, I would like to reiterate the objection to this point of view. Article 95 is the article which takes up the former Article 100A of the Treaty, on the basis of which the three previous directives, which are now being remodelled in this new directive, had been adopted. Therefore, to reject that legal basis now is to go against our previous tradition, to cast doubt upon what we had done, which seems to me to be above all very dangerous for the construction of a European legal system. To speak of subsidiarity in this area, an area strictly relating to the internal market, which specifically involves the health of the citizens, regulated by Article 95, is a way of diverting the battle and, in my view, this is very dangerous because, while the defence of an economic sector seems to me to be important, and worthy of respect, it must not lead this Parliament to change the legal basis or, as is intended for example in another amendment, to suspend any decisions until the decision of the Court of Justice on the directive on tobacco advertising is adopted. This directive which we are discussing today has nothing to do with the directive on tobacco advertising. Therefore, Mr President, I believe that we must be consistent, maintain our previous attitude in this respect, maintain the legal basis proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the Legal Services of the three institutions and refuse to accept this abuse of the subsidiarity theory which would truly put an end to the existence of the European Union and the competences of this Parliament.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the aim of the resolution is to prepare the guidelines before the conference to revise the Treaty of Non-Proliferation. Traditionally, we conclude such debates with a resolution; it therefore seemed right to do so in this case too, even though the resolution will be put to the vote during the next sitting.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, as we speak, a conference is being held elsewhere in Brussels on the reconstruction of the Balkans. Rapporteur Haug, whom I too would like to thank for the agreeable cooperation there has been between us, states that the Commission must not enter into financial commitments, or arouse expectations without first consulting the budgetary authority. I am all in favour of this. Consultation is a good thing and it is important to know which way the wind is blowing. But this must not prejudice the European Commission’s right of initiative. It is only right that the Commission, of all the institutions, should serve the interests of Europe, although it has to be said that during the negotiations for Budget 2000 we saw all too often how one half of the budgetary authority was mainly preoccupied with the national coffers. In fact the question of self-interest brings me automatically onto paragraph 22. I know that rapporteur Haug will shed no tears if we remove this paragraph from the text. Nor will my group. But it is a different story with the Council. At least I assume that the Council applauds the fact that we make the point in the text that special budgetary needs should be spread equally over all budgetary categories. After all, this will lead to cuts in the programmes in Categories 2 and 3, which are chock-a-block, whilst the lion’s share of the money left in Category 1 will be able to find its way back into the national coffers at the end of the year, on account of fluctuating prices or the anticipated changes to the sugar regime, among other factors. I hope that we will be able to re-think this commitment appropriation and agree amongst ourselves to first await the Commission’s proposals. Finally, a word about our amendment to Mr Ferber’s report. The institutions are being asked to discontinue discrimination on the basis of the nature of officials’ long-term relationships. Some of my fellow delegates thought this was going into too much detail for the guidelines. I would like to point out that what we do concern ourselves with in this text is officials who have a duty of maintenance, and allowances for dependent children. In all probability, a guideline will be adopted in the course of this year which will ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation within the labour market. I hope you will seize the opportunity to lead the way in the fight for equal treatment.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, the acquis is, of course, an important basis for accession. Can you tell us how acquis screening is proceeding in your view? With which candidate countries has most progress been made? Which chapters have been completed? Chancellor Schröder recently stated in a press conference that the first admissions will probably be in 2002. How do you assess the scenario if the legal inventory is completed in optimum time? What do you think is the earliest possible date for accession if optimum use is made of all deadlines and options?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, when we talk of the strategy on Ukraine, the question of the finality of the EU resonates in the background and hence the question of whether or not Ukraine, as an important European country, has a chance of one day becoming a member of the European Union. There are two ways of looking at this. Either we say no, economic and trade agreements suffice, in which case the EU will only be able to make a minor contribution to stability and will be unable to apply its strict criteria. Or we give Ukraine the long-term prospect of membership and immediately start applying a comprehensive stability strategy which, first and foremost, strengthens democracy and then leads to social and economic development. But then Ukraine must not become the atomic dump of Europe!

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am delighted that this debate has taken the form it has. I think that shows that in this debate at least, sweeteners can be a 'douceur' as well! The rapporteur has steered this debate impeccably through the difficulties that we often encounter with these comparatively small arguments. The problem very often is that they turn into the legislative equivalent of a Venus Flytrap. You hover around them and suddenly you are sucked in and find enormous difficulties. I believe that the three amendments the Commission has accepted are the right ones. I think it is completely satisfactory for us that we have a period of review, that we have avoided the problems that we suspected in comitology and that, as Mrs Oomen-Ruijten has said, we have been able to support and not needlessly challenge the opinion of the scientific committees. That is why I think Mr Lannoye's amendment was an amendment too far in that direction. It is not our job always to say, after there has been scientific appraisal, that is not good enough, and there should be further appraisal immediately. If you do that you devalue the work of the scientific committees, introduce an atmosphere of suspicion and end up with an unsatisfactory proposal. So I am delighted that we have moved in this direction. I am delighted also that we have reduced the level of cyclamates that can be used because of all our concerns about the exploitation of children and the way they now consume a variety of sweetened products. Finally I should say to the Commission in particular that if we could, in all circumstances, treat these small but important debates seriously but without the kind of hysteria that we sometimes get on either side, this Parliament would be a happier and a wiser place.

Political group: PSE
Unemployment is Europe’s main problem, and in Italy the situation is terrible, with unemployment exceeding 12%. We must continue to fight unemployment with efficient, incisive measures that are swiftly implemented. It is important that in this area, too, the European Parliament seeks the opportunity to intervene democratically in the choices of the European Union. The Members of the European Parliament cannot be content merely to be present, as has happened in the past, at decisions made in other places which do not meet the real needs of the populations. We do not agree with the document on employment policy guidelines as it draws on the ideas and principles of economic free trade. Nevertheless, the European Parliament is proposing some guidelines to bring about equal job opportunities for men and women, on the constant search for dialogue between the social partners and the necessary consultation of and provision of information for workers by firms. In our country, Communists are fighting for the law on union representation to be adopted swiftly, and this too is a democratic act for the work place. We have noted the European Parliament’s suggestion to bind the tax incentives to firms so that they will really contribute to job creation and not to restructuring and relocation which lead to redundancies, so as to avoid a repeat of the Michelin scandal. With limited, inadequate alarm signals being given with regard to the job market, we tabled amendments which were wholly reasonable and responsible. But they were not accepted. This is why the Italian Communists have voted against the Menrad reports.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Commissioner, the concentrations of ozone in the atmosphere are a serious problem, not only in terms of the environment, but also in terms of public health, since they affect that health of the citizens, especially amongst risk populations such as children and old people, causing allergies and cardio-respiratory difficulties, amongst other things. Concentrations of ozone are very unevenly distributed amongst the Member States. And, owing to their cross-border nature, they affect places which are often far from their source of production. Until now, the Member States have neither studied nor dealt with this phenomenon sufficiently, neither have they assessed it in a systematic and coordinated way. The result has been an absence of reliable and comparable data, as well as insufficiency in short- and long-term action plans. It is therefore very necessary that we adopt the present Directive and I take a very positive view of Mr Davies’s work, especially his approach to the problem, since he stresses the aspects of study and control and is prepared to incorporate the suggestions of other groups, which means the House is able to vote on a proposal with significant compromise amendments, which enrich the Commission’s proposal and maintain the sense of reality and viability of the measures proposed. The first important result of this Directive is that it is finally going to persuade Member States to pay more attention to the problem of tropospheric ozone, strengthening its study and control; secondly, it makes it obligatory to create short- and long-term action plans and improve rapid alert systems and public information. In this respect, its seems to me important that these plans strengthen, in each case, the study of the local conditions in which the concentrations are produced, in order thereby to combat them more effectively. I also believe it is necessary to set target dates in order to stimulate progress on the control of the problem. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore the current difficulties in guaranteeing the complete control of the concentrations of tropospheric ozone and strict compliance at all times with the values and timescales laid down. Our Group has therefore insisted on the need to seek formulae which, while strengthening the Member States’ obligations, set realistic objectives and timescales, which allow a certain flexibility in those cases where its has been physically impossible to reach the objectives and which take account, in the comparative reports, of the meteorological and local circumstances of the places where the target values have been exceeded. We have logically opposed the amendments which do not take account of the scientific possibilities of controlling the problem.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, in my opinion perversion is undoubtedly on the increase if, in addition to a child being sexually exploited, the event is recorded, in whatever fashion, and then reused for financial gain. These events are occurring every day, every hour and perhaps every minute. The perpetrators are using the most up-to-date technology to distribute their material and in the Internet they have found a medium which is more suited than any other to acting anonymously. Paedophiles are limited only by their own technical capability or the equipment which they can afford. When seen against its virtually unlimited potential, society and the state have thus far had very little at their disposal to counter illegal activity on the Internet, in particular since cyberspace has no states or geographical and political borders and its alluring feature is its worldwide accessibility. The Internet itself cannot commit crimes. What is criminal is the behaviour of some 3 to 5% of Internet users who misuse the Net for illegal purposes. 95 to 97% of the Internet is legal. The Internet is therefore a reflection of society as a whole. Just as in the real world, crime is very much a part of the virtual world. All the same, the Internet is not beyond the law. The problem of crime on the Internet cannot be resolved by any state in isolation. For this we need uniform worldwide crimes and definitions so that law enforcement authorities can work together in global terms and not in opposition. In the area of child pornography in particular, where the rights of children are continually being trampled underfoot, there is an urgent need for global regulation. The EU has already taken several measures towards this, which I will not go into any further here. I would like to congratulate Mr Kirkhope on his report. It is a high-quality text. Nevertheless, to effectively combat child pornography, it is necessary, in my opinion, for Europol to be immediately informed of cases of child pornography and for the exchange of information with the competent authorities to be carried out quickly and directly, as stated in Amendment No 20 from Gerhard Schmid. All the proposed measures are suitable and necessary to effectively combat child pornography. However, we must not forget that, in addition to the technological and police measures, we must also combat poverty, ignorance and prejudice in order to improve society’s image of children and children’s image of themselves and to offer help to the victims; thus far, victim support has played too insignificant a role. We need a social climate in which the victims of vile crimes are not left to fend for themselves whilst the perpetrators are shielded through failure to act and fear of embarrassing revelations. (Applause) IN THE CHAIR: MR COLOM I NAVALVice-President

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the Union’s Mediterranean policy must not only gain shape, but also gain substance. It should be filled with content and not emptied. It is essential that we strengthen political, economic and social ties and continue to move forward. We now have an association agreement with Morocco, in force since 2 March, which makes that country a privileged partner. However, there can be no close cooperation with Morocco without dealing with an activity – fishing – on which the economies of many European regions depend. I would like to mention the fisheries agreement between the European Community and Morocco, which expired on 30 November last year. Well, four months later, we are in a vacuum. We still have no date for a start to negotiations. Not to renew that agreement would be a backwards step in our Mediterranean policy, because if that policy is to be more than empty rhetoric, we must make progress in specific cases. Mediterranean policy takes its name from the sea where, for centuries, European and North African fishermen have fished together. The Commission should fulfil its duty and ensure that these negotiations finally begin.

Political group: PSE