GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Article 299(2) of the Treaty provides for the possibility of introducing special measures in order to ensure the survival of activities in the outermost regions where a climate of legal certainty is greatly needed if economic operators are to maintain their position and to grow. The production of rum has a major impact on the economy of the French overseas departments as 40 000 jobs are involved. The Council Decision of 1995, which is due to expire at the end of this year, authorises France to impose a reduced rate of excise duty within French metropolitan territory for “traditional” rum produced in the French overseas departments. The current review of the COM in the sugar sector and the dismantling of customs barriers in 2003 have led France to propose that these tax arrangements be maintained beyond 2002 on the grounds that the measures adopted at national and Community level would not in themselves be enough to allow FOD products to compete with products from other regions. In order to preserve this traditional agricultural activity, which generates jobs at every stage of cane-sugar-rum production, the current system sets a minimum level for imports from the FOD into France which is strictly limited and supervised in order to compete with the ever-increasing sales of rum from third countries, which are not subject to the same production specifications. In order to ensure the survival of the sector, rum producers in the FOD are obliged to use local raw materials, which guarantees quality, but which, for example, prevents Guadelupian rum from being produced using cane from Martinique as well as from third countries. Rum from the overseas departments is therefore obliged to participate in the FOD rural development policy, which increases restrictions and production costs and places it in a disadvantageous position on the market in relation to products from third countries. The dispensational tax system therefore merely aims to compensate for the obligation incumbent on FOD producers to participate in the survival of the cane-sugar-rum sector. (Intervention cut short pursuant to Rule 137 of the Rules of Procedure) Glante report (A5-0005/2002)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, many people are very concerned about globalisation. They join forces in organisations, and the most extreme also throw stones. In the meantime, the EU is blamed for making the negative aspects of globalisation worse. I believe that the discussion we are having today and the discussion we had concerning the Menrad report in our committee demonstrate the very opposite. They show that the EU can, in a very practical way, contribute to mitigating the negative aspects of the free market, in this case restructurings. The EU cannot abolish these, and nor should it, for they are a part of a modern market economy and they can have positive effects. However, we can try to mitigate the negative effects by properly involving employees in the process. What we are doing today and what we shall hopefully do in the future by means of a new directive is, in a very practical way, to make the market a little more democratic. The directive has already had an effect. The Commission’s report shows this. Works councils have been set up as a result of the directive. As other speakers too have said, there are, however, many things which can be improved, and I hope that the Commission will allow itself to be inspired by Parliament’s report today. Some of the improvements must take the form of cultural changes within companies. Undertakings must realise that consultation and the provision of information are not a laborious and onerous duty but a constructive part of modern management and that creating partnerships also creates responsible employees. At the same time, I hope that the Commission will lose no time at all in proceeding further with its deliberations concerning a new directive, and I should like to see an expansion of the topics on which employees are consulted. I think that, in general, we must look at the position of our fellow workers. We must understand that they are ordinary people from ordinary backgrounds who come together in the works councils. They must be given time off work, and there is a need for premises, training and translation facilities so that they can carry out their tasks as employee representatives. I also believe that employees must be able more readily to involve trade union experts. We must appreciate that there is a need to improve their conditions. A future directive might properly implement the constructive changes proposed by Parliament. These are not fanatical and far-reaching changes, but very constructive ones, and I hope that the Commission will take them on board when it proposes a new directive. Properly designed, the latter can be a further step in the direction of a European social model.

Political group: PSE
I welcome the Council’s acceptance of the European Parliament’s proposal that workers’ and users’ organisations participate in the work of the agency, especially on its Administrative Board, but these bodies must be allowed to nominate their own representatives, rather than have them appointed by the Commission. Naturally, Parliament wants representatives of the workers’ organisations to participate in the working parties which will later draw up recommendations, and not just, as the Council suggests, in the subsequent consultation process. Contrary to the proposal of the Commission and Parliament, the Council wants the agency’s Administrative Board to contain one representative from each Member State. Parliament supports the proposal of only six Council representatives, a position we oppose. As for the six representatives of railway undertakings, infrastructure managers, the railway industry, unions representing employees, rail freight users and rail passengers, the Council supports the Commission’s proposal that they be nominated by the Commission.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, our group regards this incident as being so important that we do not consider it appropriate for it to be dealt with in the topical and urgent debate. We think that we should address this matter in the form of an oral question to the Council and the Commission, and would like to draft this carefully to ensure that both the Council and the Commission do discuss it. We do not think that the time is right to discuss this matter in a topical and urgent debate and would therefore request that this item be deleted from the agenda.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to focus on employment and social issues. I very much welcome the document produced by the presidency this week as part of the preparations for the special summit in March. It presents a commendable, coherent approach, an holistic approach which is very welcome, all the more so because it takes into account a number of the important proposals we have made in this House in recent years. These include the need to improve coordination between the employment strategy and the broad economic guidelines. I look forward to the implementation of the proposals you will agree in March and hope you get the support you need. Just one thing prevented my joy from being complete and that was in relation to the convergence of social protection. Many of us in this House hoped to see a Luxembourg-type procedure on convergence in social protection but I am afraid the language of the document falls far short of that, talking instead about joint analysis, cooperation and the exchange of best practice. That is not enough to bring about the modernisation in social protection systems that we need within the European Union. Turning to specific social dossiers, there are two I would like to look at very briefly. One very important one for us is the general framework on information and consultation. I hope progress will be made on that dossier during the Portuguese Presidency. But there is also the modernisation of the works council directive, its review and amendment. In recent months I have been visited by workers from Michelin in France, Ford in Portugal and yesterday by ABB-Alsthom workers affected by that merger, workers who have been denied their rights under the works council directive. It needs to be updated and it needs to be implemented by the Commission. The Commission is failing in its duty. If we are serious about partnership at work and the improvements that can bring; if we are serious about innovation and productivity, we need to review the legislation in this area and make sure both sides of industry show proper respect for each other in that process of partnership.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we do not support the Commission’s guidelines. They are outdated and obsoleted by events and do not contain any prospect of a solution to the extremely serious problems which are both holding back economic development and, in particular, weighing down the citizens. The proposed formulae will lead to ruin: flexibility at all costs, further dismantling of the Welfare State with pension cuts, the imposition of unjustified salary restrictions across the board, and even discrimination between regions, a decrease in public investment and obsessive recourse to the Stability Pact and the monetarism which have not only already caused irreparable harm in the past but have certainly not done anything to support a euro which is yielding increasingly to the supremacy of the dollar. The acclaimed macroeconomic development for job creation is so tied up in the self-regulation of the free market that it has not yet created any jobs, rather it has destroyed stable jobs, while, in the worst of cases, contributing to keeping salaries low in precarious employment sectors. This is not the way to fight unemployment, but it will heighten social poverty, increase the democratic deficit and feed public scepticism towards the democratic institutions.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I thank the Commissioner for his answer. I especially liked what he said about there being no room for compromises. Is the EU position absolutely fixed, with no likelihood of it being altered in the near future? I should also like to raise the point about international funding for decommissioning. Is that to come from the Commission's own budget? What happens if there is insufficient money for that decommissioning?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to express an opinion on the action plan as it relates to the preservation of biodiversity in the context of economic cooperation and as it relates to development cooperation. We have already heard this evening that the greatest degree of biodiversity is to be found in the tropical regions of the developing countries. These parts of the world have a wide range of crop plants, livestock, wild animals, etc. Moreover – and this is equally important in our eyes – huge numbers of the local, the indigenous, populations are dependent on the existence of this biodiversity. If the breadth of biodiversity is now reduced, if there are major erosions of the natural world, this will create a knock-on effect which will plunge the people of these tropical regions into poverty. We also know that, unless action is taken to combat poverty, it becomes very difficult to raise and foster awareness of the need for biodiversity and sustainability. This is why it is important that this action plan seeks to integrate the principle of preserving biodiversity into the development-cooperation programmes of the European Union. This means supporting the sustainable use of natural resources, particularly forests, as well as more frequent recourse to environmental-impact assessments of planned development projects. May I also express the support of my group for all those amendments which emphasise the fundamental role of indigenous populations and their social, economic and cultural rights? Now that we are talking about biodiversity and, of course, sustainability too, I should not wish to miss this opportunity to say that we must also put our own house in order if we want to possess credibility in the eyes of the international community. When I recall the discussions on the resolution concerning the Barcelona Summit, a resolution which referred quite clearly to specific projects in Europe that contravene the principle of biodiversity and fail to protect rare flora and fauna, I am persuaded that it is not enough for us here in Europe merely to keep tabling splendid resolutions designed to protect mountain gorillas in African forests but that we also need to engage wholeheartedly in the implementation of projects and of our own European programmes, such as Natura 2000.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, the dark clouds of recession are looming in the west, in part due to the piercing of the asset bubble of the US stock market, but further exacerbated by the tragic events of 11 September. The US Federal Reserve has now dropped the federal funds rate to 2.5% – a 39-year low. This is the ninth rate cut this year. The ECB may respond shortly, but almost two years since the euro's launch, there is as yet little enthusiasm for its future role as the major international reserve currency. This is in part the result of exchange-rate weakness and, in part, because the notes and coins are not yet in circulation, so it cannot yet be heralded as an unqualified success. It remains to be seen if the one-size-fits-all model of interest rates will work in all the countries of the Union, in particular countries like Ireland. These concerns and the added concerns about constitutional implications and loss of sovereignty leave my country, the UK, happy to remain outside for the time being. Although clearly we all wish the project well, it has frankly confounded many pessimists including our former Prime Minister John Major. Some years ago, the Commission in its McDougal report concluded that central tax-raising powers of at least 7% of GDP would be needed to allow counter-cyclical spending and transfer payments to make a single-currency zone function properly. This would, of course, have been anathema to Member States, so they decided instead on strict spending, borrowing and inflation limits in Dublin in 1996 as an alternative. Recently, there have been calls to make these Stability and Growth Pact ceilings more flexible. This is unwise in my opinion, as I believe firmly that a prudent approach to public finance and borrowing is a good thing. Furthermore, the British economy is linked to and becoming more convergent with the euro zone, so we all have an incentive to stick to the guidelines and we must not allow the US crisis to be an excuse for new, big government tax-and-spend policies. The Stability Pact includes mechanisms designed to operate in recession and Article 2.1 on the excessive deficit procedure could be used in exceptional circumstances to justify higher military or security spending. But Member States should concentrate on structural reforms, particularly in their labour markets, as the way ahead. Otherwise, we would only have high inflation and massive increases in the mountain of national debt.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr Bowis has done an extraordinary job as rapporteur on this major and complicated issue. In fact, there are a whole lot of important and, on the face of it, conflicting objectives to be achieved in this matter of food safety, including that of safety itself. In this connection, I should like to speak up for cheap food of the kind which families with children buy and which children and young people eat. We are also concerned with the freedom to develop food and the food sector and also with the conservation of Europe’s cultural heritage. A central aspect of this is to ensure that the rich heritage of traditions can be preserved. I therefore want to give my support to Amendment No 15. I nonetheless believe that one issue has not been properly discussed, namely the need for uniform regulations to be followed up by uniform and thorough supervision. It should not be forgotten that, viewed as a whole, the food sector is the biggest workplace in the European Union. We must ensure that the regulations are complied with in the same way throughout the European Union. Otherwise, we interfere both with safety and free competition in the internal market. I should like to repeat this: ensure that the regulations are properly complied with, the length and breadth of the Union.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I should like to join with you in condemning these atrocious attacks on the Jewish synagogues in Istanbul. As we all know, Turkey is a country that is proud of the fact that, when the Jews were being persecuted by the terrible pogroms in Europe in the Middle Ages, it gave them refuge. It is right to be proud of this part of its history. When these terrible attacks took place, the Turkish president happened to be out of the country on an official visit to support an illegal regime which Turkey and the Turkish armed forces have created and are obstinately maintaining in northern Cyprus, contrary to the directives of the international community. This coincidence alone speaks volumes and I hope that it will enlighten Mr Erdogan and that he will take Turkey, as I am sure he wants to, off the road of illegality and tyranny which only harbours tragedy for Turkey itself and the rest of the world.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, don’t get so worked up! This is an essential point which is really important. From the voting point of view, Mrs Maes is quite right. Mr Chichester, I am surprised that you of all people wanted to have the point “socially-balanced” voted on separately. We voted for it by a large majority in the Committee. However, the only thing that I should really like to see is that the voting procedure runs properly. I would therefore ask you to grant Mrs Maes’ request.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, there is nothing new about the conflict between Russia and Chechnya, that small country in the Caucasus with little more than a million inhabitants which, nevertheless, has the same right as any large country to freely determine its own future. The last precursor to the current conflict took place between 1994 and 1996, a war which cost 100,000 lives. Now, since 22 September, Russian warplanes have begun to bomb Grozny and other cities. The Russian army has entered the Republic’s territory and has invaded, according to its own sources, a third of its territory causing death, destruction and a massive exodus of more than 100,000 refugees – women, children and the elderly – who have entered neighbouring Ingushetia, whose President is now talking of humanitarian disaster and is requesting international aid which is not arriving. It is also true that Russia has, in previous weeks, suffered horrendous terrorist attacks which have caused considerable loss of life, supposedly carried out by guerrillas who are based in the mountains of the Caucasus. The European Union must not remain passive in the face of this conflict, once again displaying the same spectacular inactivity that we showed during the early years of the war in Yugoslavia. It is essential and urgent that all the institutions of the European Union make a serious plea to the Governments of Russia and Chechnya to end the escalation of war, silence their weapons and take up political dialogue, using all our resources – of whatever type – so that our voice may be heard. It is essential and urgent that we use all the measures available to us so that we may re-assert human rights in the region, so that the refugees may count on all the humanitarian aid that they require and so that, finally, they may return to their homes as a result of peace being established once more.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, in accordance with the Nordic public service tradition, the European Parliament has, positively enough, claimed that the Ombudsman's position should be strengthened and consolidated. The European Ombudsman ought to be completely impartial when carrying out his or her duties and when he or she – right now it is Jacob Söderman, a man and a good Finland-Swedish representative – defends the rights of citizens in cases of bad administration. Only in this way can the office of Ombudsman, at EU level too, serve its important and more profound purposes. Therefore, we in the Swedish Christian Democrat Party warmly welcome the steps that are now about to be taken also to promote the Ombudsman's independence in such fundamental areas as the budget. This is an important credibility issue for the independence and impartiality of the office of Ombudsman. We in the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs have consistently given our full support to this positive measure. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Almeida Garrett, for her contribution in this important matter. Finally, allow me to take up another topical issue which concerns the development of the office of Ombudsman. It concerns the right of access to documents without restriction, something which is only rarely utilised. This is a prerequisite for giving the institution of Ombudsman high credibility among citizens. An Ombudsman is naturally bound by secrecy provisions, but it is good for citizens to know that, as Ombudsman, he or she can obtain access to documents which they cannot access themselves as citizens. It is also important to realise that the Ombudsman's right of access to documents has nothing to do with the current regulation on openness, which is a frequent misconception. The European Parliament, its Committee on Constitutional Affairs and, we hope, the Commission and the Council too, want to see continued development and a strengthening of the office of Ombudsman and its independence and, alongside that, its credibility among citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
The admission of Romania to the EU in 2007 is quite rightly giving rise to misgivings and disquiet, but sometimes for the wrong reasons. Yesterday, I heard the Group of the European People’s Party use the argument that, in Romania, too few businesses had been privatised over recent years. There were at least as many reasons to seriously criticise Romania when it was under its former right-wing government as there are now that the present one, which calls itself left-wing, is in power. Children begging and sniffing glue, poor people without any right to medical care, decaying buildings and public amenities, a democratic deficit, corruption and the colla of public services are as much a fact of life now as they were then. I have even recently received the complaint from a Romanian party, the Socialist Workers’ Party, which now has to call itself the Socialist Alliance Party in order to remain legal, which started by gaining 4.6% of votes in elections in the 1990s, but was later, in the official results, given 3.9%, thus falling below the 4% threshold and remaining outside the parliament. It is doubtful whether Romania has ever met the Copenhagen criteria for a democratic state where the rule of law prevails, or that it will do so within a reasonable period of time. That can be a good reason not to put its accession on a faster track than that of Turkey, where too, much is amiss.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, one part-session follows another and, as far as I am concerned, they are all starting to look alike. Last time, I declared an interest in the radio and television broadcasting sector. I must now repeat this statement with regard to this report. I shall not therefore take part in any votes on the matter. What is more, I shall have to repeat this same declaration in relation to the following report, by Mr van Velzen, unless you would care to take note of my statement on the subject as of now.

Political group: ELDR