GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Mr Aznar, Mr Prodi, ladies and gentlemen, as a Member from the Canary Islands, one of the Community’s outermost regions, and a member of the European Liberal and Democratic Reform Group, I warmly welcome the Presidency-in-Office of the Council. Do not forget, Mr Aznar, to deal with the outstanding issues facing us in this six-month period to come, during which enlargement and the euro are presenting the European Community with a very special kind of landscape, in which the whole world is more or less affected for various reasons which oblige us to make constant, permanent and joint efforts to achieve peace and prosperity. I must remind you that, in our European sphere, in all the pillars of the Community edifice, we have maintenance problems. Therefore, Community policies must include something which you have pointed out: ‘more Europe’. And this is true, especially when it comes to reviewing the CAP, the Structural Funds, the consolidation of the situation of the outermost regions and creating a genuine European immigration strategy. It is also true when it comes to institutional reforms, defining the role and the participation of the regions in the construction of the Europe of the Twenty-first Century and an appropriate environmental policy, without forgetting the fields of social policy, that is, employment and the SMEs. Neither must you forget, in your dual capacity as President-in-Office of the Council and Spanish Prime Minister, to export more Europe to the world. To this end, we must review the Union’s external relations – such as the Council’s common position on Cuba and the future of the Sahara, by means of a self-determination referendum – without forgetting the dialogue with our Mediterranean neighbours – from Morocco to the Middle East – or with more distant regions, such as Latin America, with the problem of Argentina, or the United States and China. Of course you can count on our support, as always, in the joint European political fight against terrorism. I wish you luck in this special mandate and I trust that we will all be able to celebrate together following your success in the June exams, because what is good for Europe is good for everybody, especially the outermost regions.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would like to join my colleagues in thanking Mr Rothley very much, not just for this report but for the sustained campaign that he has run over many years, as the Commissioner indicated, to improve the whole insurance climate for Europe's motorists. I think he deserves a lot of credit for that, and it reflects well on Parliament too. Since I joined the Parliament in 1999, I have had the pleasure of working with Mr Rothley on this subject in which I have taken a particular interest. I contributed to the 2001 report and am delighted to say that a number of the ideas that flowed from that are now incorporated in this very welcome Fifth proposal from the Commission. Mr Rothley and others have talked particularly about issues of improving the ability of motorists to claim damages for accidents outside their own country. I want to focus on a few other detailed points. Many of us have dealt with constituency cases concerning the difficulties of people temporarily moving to other countries – particularly students or people taking up work or even citizens wishing to make long-term stays. They have difficulty in getting their insurance extended for that temporary stay and having insurance extended for up to 12 months. I think this is a very important benefit. Secondly, we are concerned in our committee about the internal market and simplifying the regime which allows citizens to go and buy a car from another country and have their existing insurance extended for 30 days while they bring that car home and have it re-registered. This is just an important simplification. It underlines the fact that in the internal market, citizens expect to be able to have these rights delivered across borders without inconvenience – that is really what this proposal is all about. In a similar vein, making insurance purchase easier and more competitive, by enabling citizens to get their insurance claim records delivered to them wherever they have had insurance previously, so that they can use their past clean record to gain important price and coverage benefits for their insurance is an important benefit. In conclusion, Mr Karas has talked about some of the improvements we have made, and I agree with him about some of the areas into which I think we have intruded too far into Member States' prerogatives. One area which has been drawn to my attention in the last few days is the right for claims to lapse after four years. In my own country, the United Kingdom, that cuts across national provisions. There are strong arguments for having a look at this again and this is something I will talk to the rapporteur about. We need to discuss whether we should support that provision in the final report or ask the Commission and Council to look at this before it finally comes back. Overall this is an excellent piece of work. It has our full support, and I would like to thank both the Commission and the rapporteur for the work they have done in moving this important benefit forward for all of Europe's citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as the elected representative of the Pensioners' Party to this Parliament, I was very happy to vote for the Trakatellis report, a very important report. I was worried about what I was going to say in my explanation of vote because I did not dream at all last night, and I was very heavy eyed when I woke up. However, precisely because I was very tired, I closed my eyes a little while ago and had a vision. I saw Mrs Trakatellis as if in a dream. However, she looked like a pill, and there was writing on the pill which said 'for use against cardiovascular diseases', while other types of pills, also Trakatellis pills, bore the words 'for use against neuro-psychiatric disorders', 'for use against children's diseases', etc. I therefore saw Mrs Trakatellis' important report as the sole means of curing the diseases of all the citizens of Europe. Congratulations Mrs Trakatellis!

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, in my turn I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur on his report, in which he does indeed get to the heart of the matter, namely the urgent need for greater coherence in the policy pursued, greater coordination between development policy and other policy fields and between European development policy and that of the Member States. The setting up of a permanent task force to coordinate the development policy of the Union and the Member States and to strengthen the European position in international bodies, is a laudable idea. In addition, the Gemelli report adds precision to the Commission’s document on a number of important points. Information and communications technology must indeed be a major priority. The same applies, for that matter, to conflict prevention, which unfortunately is only mentioned indirectly in the Commission document. Then there is health policy. There is certainly an urgent need for affordable and more efficient drugs for basic developing world diseases, such as TB, malaria and sleeping sickness. The Commission’s action programme on pharmaceutical drugs is commendable but inadequate. It may encourage research into tropical medicines, but it is mainly the European taxpayer who is likely to foot the bill. A more fundamental requirement seems to me that the poorest countries should obtain cheaper licences for the production and sale of drugs against basic diseases. It is also a more fundamental requirement that an end should be put to so-called “heritage piracy”, that is, claiming patients via the heritage of developing countries by making use of the knowledge of local healers. In the almost two years that I have been a Member of this Parliament I have already voted for five reports arguing for greater coherence in development policy. You won’t mind my asking today when the Council and the Commission are finally going to make this a priority.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, two months ago we were debating this same report, because the agricultural alcohol problem is actually one that has arisen owing to the large amount of agricultural alcohol produced in the candidate countries for accession, because the future negotiation with the WTO may give rise to further reductions in border production, and also owing to the foreseeable growth in demand for bioethanol as fuel in the European Union. Because of this, the Council of Ministers of 17 July 2000 called on the Commission to introduce a regulatory framework for alcohol of agricultural origin, but the Commission went much further and proposed a COM, which did not include any financial measures but did allow for the possibility of establishing tariff quotas and safeguard clauses, prohibiting or restricting the use of inward processing arrangements, and a specific provision on aid. This proposal, however, made by the Commission did not include synthetic alcohol, although 70% of ethyl alcohol users can use it industrially; only the 30% involved in the production of spirit drinks can only use alcohol of agricultural origin. Because synthetic alcohol was not included, and because at the time no legal basis could be found for bringing it into a COM, Parliament referred the report back to committee two months ago. Afterwards the Council continued its deliberations and has reached an advance agreement to include synthetic alcohol and has asked us for a second report. The Council and Parliament are now in agreement, and I think the Commission should take this into account. This report proposes in one of its amendments – the most important one – to change the title: instead of a COM, what is proposed is a Council regulation laying down specific measures concerning the market in ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin within the European Union. It is proposed that synthetic alcohol should also be included in these measures, especially with regard to statistics. It is also proposed that the Management Committee for Wine should have competence in these matters, but that a specific working party should be set up within the Management Committee for Wine to deal with alcohol of agricultural origin. It is also proposed that Article 10 should be deleted because, as this is not a COM, an article referring to aids does not make sense. Besides, as these are national aids, I think they come under the heading of all state aids, regardless of whether they are for agricultural alcohol or for some other matter. Commissioner, please pass on all these amendments, which I ask should be voted on in the House tomorrow, to the competent Commissioner, together with the understanding that the Council and Parliament are in agreement on this aspect.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on behalf of the French delegation, I offer our full support for the draft Statute for Members proposed in Mr Rothley’s report. The success of the enlargement process renders the adoption of this report even more urgent. We approve of the approach taken in it and its underlying principles, above all those of openness and equal pay. The transparency of the system through which Members are paid must be increased: citizens are far from unconcerned about this issue. They demand answers from us. We should, moreover, apply the principle of equal pay for all Members as rigorously as possible. In order to put this principle into practice intelligently, allowances need to be adapted to reflect differences in living standards among the Member States. This is the means by which we will achieve truly equal pay. Similar mechanisms for adjusting pay according to the location of the workplace already exist for European officials, and are considered fair. The French delegation has accordingly tabled an amendment to Article 16 of the draft Statute to this effect. We invite you to join us in supporting it. Please allow me to make an appeal to caution: democracy has a price, as we all know, and citizens must understand that. I would like to close by saying to you that this Statute, although not perfect, is a step forward, a step towards true European democracy. I hope that the Council will respect Parliament’s work.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, we and the rapporteur, Mr Savary, have gone a long way towards accommodating the Council by including umpteen proposed amendments here in plenary in order to reconcile the two versions. The Council should accept our opinion and the Commission should support us, not the Council, Commissioner. Secondly, please be so kind as to point out to your employees that the report is not from the Committee on Regional Policy, but from the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, because we are devising a transport policy for the whole Community, not just for the regions.

Political group: PPE-DE
We voted against certain points in Mr Bullmann’s report on the European Council’s Spring Summit 2002, the Lisbon process and the direction to be followed in future. We are basically well-disposed towards the European Union. Through European integration, cross-border problems can be solved more effectively than they would be if they were only to be tackled within each Member State. Such problems may relate, for example, to the environment, trade, movement across borders, human rights and conflict management. As Liberals, we also believe, however, in the subsidiarity principle. Every political decision should be made as close to those affected by the decision as is possible and appropriate. Those issues which are not clearly of a cross-border nature, or those cases in which there are clear differences between different countries or regions should therefore be dealt with at local, regional or national level. The EU should concern itself with those issues it is best qualified to deal with. Social and employment policies are areas we believe are best addressed within each country, region or municipality. The EU should only have limited competence within these areas. Each Member State should have full responsibility for its social security systems and the right to make its own decisions about them. To quote examples, neither child care nor employment policy is harmonised at EU level. These issues are not of a directly cross-border nature. Moreover, there are major differences between national and local opinions on what may be considered the best policy. Nor are all these issues best dealt with through political decisions. For example, high growth and sound competition are more important for employment than political measures. That would not, however, prevent the EU’s Member States from cooperating and exchanging ideas in the social sphere. Closely linked to social and employment policy is, of course, the tax burden. We are therefore also voting against European coordination in the area of tax. Taxes should be decided upon as close to the people as possible. Social issues, equality, sustainable development and increased employment are important issues. We wholeheartedly support many of the ideas – though far from all of them – presented in Mr Bullmann’s report, but at national or local level.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I thank the Greek Presidency very much of course for the reply, but I must nonetheless express my disillusionment. It is a standard reply, a cool reply. It is a reply that shows no evidence of any engagement. People talk, people communicate and no progress is made. I am chairman of the Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee and I am now beginning to get to know the culture and the methodology by which you have to tackle problems of this kind. I think that some energy, some engagement is really appropriate here. Hundreds of thousands of people have signed a petition that is coming in to Médecins sans Frontières on a separate web site. Hundreds of thousands of Europeans want politics to make every effort to make the Russians specifically tackle this matter. The reality is that our Russian colleagues only tackle this matter as a criminal matter, as a workaday matter. I would therefore like to ask the Greek Presidency to show more engagement in the matter and to ensure that action is actually taken.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the foot-and-mouth epidemic in Great Britain and its spread to mainland Europe clearly demonstrate that the disease apparently cannot be halted with the current strategy. I do not believe that we are out of the woods yet. Ever since the first case of foot-and-mouth disease, the Commission has supported the slaughter of lambs and the blazing pyres, and has been reluctant to approve other methods of tackling the disease which might have been agreed at national level. In my view, this is a major political risk, as the costs and benefits are very difficult to quantify. Putting our money on the economy from the outset would have been the right approach. A vaccination programme at the very start of the foot-and-mouth outbreak would have saved a great deal of money, but above all, it would have saved a great deal of personal suffering. It is estimated that around 200 million livestock are moved around the EU every year. Traceability in this commercial chain, especially in the necessary chronological order, is always problematical and uncertain. Even in normal years – without BSE and foot-and-mouth crises – the error rates are high. The common agricultural policy has its own powerful momentum, and it is difficult to halt it once it is under way. That is why it would have been necessary to identify a number of viable and practical alternatives to the current strategy to combat FMD. The present approach is mediocre and irrational – so I am delighted that it is to be changed. Beef consumption has decreased by 50 per cent. Prices have hit rock-bottom, and the monthly wages bill can no longer be covered from beef production. Commissioner Fischler's compensation programme is to be enhanced with an eighth point, namely the removal of the penalty bonus for the milk quota. This makes sense, as cattle sales have been stopped. Jobs and livelihoods in agriculture, food production and processing are at stake. There is no longer any rural tourism, even in areas which are free of FMD. Even relatives are staying at home. Patching this up through a 'rural renewal' programme could take years. After all, cattle cannot be produced overnight. Vaccination must be utilised more effectively throughout Europe as a normal instrument to combat the disease. It must be ensured, in this context, that vaccinated animals and their products are commercially viable, in other words, that they can be marketed without any trade barriers. Discriminatory tests must be developed as a matter of urgency in order to allow vaccinated animals to be easily distinguished from infected stock. This should also make it easier for the Commission to give the Member States more scope than before to have their say in decisions on measures to prevent and eradicate the disease.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the current European economic and social model has unfortunately not brought about the desired results. The added impact of enlargement may also put further strain on the system and create new imbalances and unexpected changes in employment patterns and social cohesion. The scourge of unemployment and job instability within the European Union still defies the many action plans and initiatives for economic and social reforms launched in the past. Poverty is still with us and the traditional social security systems are threatened. Add to this certain negative aspects of the impact of globalisation and the picture gets bleaker. There is no social stability and no real prosperity where there is unemployment, where there are imminent threats to existing jobs and competitiveness is gradually eroded due to macro-economic policies, fiscal measures and constraints that are not adapted to the existing situation on the ground. It must be said a priori that any corrective measures that have to be taken should in no way have any negative impact on existing levels of social protection. Ideally in the future the European economic and social model needs to be more flexible in its application. The same applies to the European monetary and fiscal policies. Ways have to be found of establishing how flexibility and fair competition can co-exist and how the social market economy will have less of the free market component and more of the social component. The enlarged European Union presents a whole range of regional and subregional social economic scenarios. Each has its own specificities and each is in need of its own tailor-made action plan to help attract investment, create jobs, maintain its competitive edge and attract new growth sectors, while ensuring social stability and sustainable growth levels. Coming as I do from the smallest Member State, which is an island state, I am very conscious that EU-wide economic and social policies applied indiscriminately on a 'one-size-fits-all' basis do not invariably bring about the desired results either in job creation or in a better quality of life for our citizens. This is why I strongly believe that, to be successful, the future EU economic and social model should have ingrained within it the possibility to be flexible and be applied in a tailor-made fashion to specific sites and situations, as well as being endowed with the necessary flexibility in its application to be effective under different socio-economic scenarios. Only in this way can we really hope to see further job creation, better quality of life, more prosperity, better social cohesion and more stability within the future enlarged European Union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, you are quite right, we have withdrawn the motions for resolutions. If I may briefly explain, we withdrew them because we shall be holding a longer, more detailed debate on this subject during the next Strasbourg session. I think that it makes more sense, given the worsening situation in Iraq, to hold a debate once the Council and Commission have made statements detailing their position rather than under the urgency procedure. That was our reason for withdrawing them.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I would like to explain very briefly why my group has tabled this motion which, relates to what is becoming known, in the French newspapers in particular, as the Danone case. This is an important issue that goes beyond the limits of responsibility of one group. As it happens, it concerns the policy of a large food processing company which has recently achieved financial results described by the president of the company himself as excellent, and which, at the same time, decided to shed 3 000 jobs and to close several sites in various Member States of the European Union. It seems to me that we cannot, on the one hand, make full employment a priority for European Union action and work on drafting a European Company Statute to lay down new rights for employees and, on the other hand, calmly accept this type of strategy, which puts the interests of shareholders before everything. This is why I propose an urgent debate on this matter.

Political group: GUE-NGL