GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I would like to thank everyone for their comments but I agree most with the comment made by Mr Hänsch. Maybe it is useful occasionally to look at how we set about things here in Parliament. This seems a very enjoyable exercise.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to start by thanking our rapporteur, Mrs Corbey, for the work she has done on this report and on the proposals that are on the table. We have just heard how the way we deal with packaging has a decisive part to play in shaping the future of our environment, and how there is – of course – a market in this field, one in which the big packaging groups are competing with one another, so that we have to give some thought as to how we achieve an optimum level of effectiveness. Within this market there are specialities, which represent the opportunities offered by diversity in Europe. Where these are concerned we have stressed the need for this great pot to safeguard the interests, futures and chances of survival of the small firms, scattered throughout Europe, working in the ceramics sector and producing highly-prized packaging such as that for Meaux mustard and similar goods. To describe them as an industry would be an exaggeration, in that they have between 30 and 50 workers each. It is for this reason that the keynote of our amendments is that the directive should not cover packaging materials which cannot be utilised for energy recovery owing to their material quality, which are inert, and the quantities of which do not exceed 0.1% of the proven quantity of packaging in the Community, and for which material or raw material recycling is ruled out for ecological and cost-benefit reasons. We have just heard from the Commissioner – and for this we are grateful – that the packaging directive’s recycling order will not apply to ceramics. There must, of course, be a place for ceramics in the packaging directive, but recycling it would mean that it would have to be transported back across Europe, in minimal quantities, in order for this to be done. Systems for its return, collection and recovery would have to be introduced. That would kill off small businesses. We cannot believe that Europe is about enacting directives that cut away the economic basis from under small firms that offer speciality goods that are highly prized in Europe. I thank you for your unambiguous statement, which is something we can build on, and which will also give the firms a certain amount of breathing space and a reliable prospect of future development.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the Commission and the rapporteur, whom we congratulate for their work, recognise the need to bring to maturity... Given the volume of noise that can be heard, I shall stop to make a point of order. The indifference of MEPs and of the Community Institutions must be the reason for the corresponding indifference of our citizens towards Community Institutions; every time that a problem in the area of social affairs is discussed, there is a complete lack of interest... (The President cut the speaker off) As I was saying, the Commission and the rapporteur recognise the need to bring to maturity the guidelines which achieved positive results but which also have some gaps. We are far from achieving the coordination of employment and economic policies which article 126 of the Treaty recommends. The Commission made appropriate recommendations on the creation of effective work, on small and medium-sized enterprises and employment taxes that we Socialists hope will not weaken financial support for social security systems. With regard to the creation of the Employment Committee, we think that it could play a major role in finalising the guidelines and steering them through at local and regional levels, which does not happen satisfactorily at the moment, as well as in including the long-term unemployed and unemployed young people. We ask the Members of the European People’s Party to reconsider their position with regard to quantifiable and qualified goals, so that these guidelines become as efficient as we would all like them to be. The Commission will have to take into account the proposals of Parliament which, although it has been left out of this process, still bears responsibility for the unemployed: it is essential that Parliament accepts its responsibilities as regards the problem of illegal work and the people who live and work in run-down industrial zones. Mr President, the absence at a national level of any real dialogue involving serious commitments is hampering the modernisation of technology and organisation, and the Michelin case is a prime example of this.

Political group: PSE
We believe, for reasons of justice, that two levels of compensation for passengers would be the best solution, in practice one within the EU and one outside the EU. In the absence of alternatives, we are, however, voting with the Group of the , that is to say for three levels of compensation.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Côte d'Ivoire has got itself into a vicious circle and the situation is going from bad to worse. By playing with the concept of Ivorian identity in order to exclude Mr Ouattara from the political scene, the powers that be are paving the way for ethnic conflict. It is not just Mr Ouattara; rather all the people in the north, all the Muslims and anyone with a name which sounds vaguely foreign are subject to persecution and violence. The dozens of deaths over recent days make me fear the worse. If this policy continues, there will be a bloodbath, just like the bloodbaths we have seen in other countries. Laurent Gbagbo needs to introduce a real policy of national reconciliation by ending the discussion on Ivorian identity, revising the racist constitution and holding democratic elections open to all candidates; otherwise the risk of secession and civil war can only grow. How can a legislative election in which only 34% of the population voted and which millions boycotted claim a legitimate result? We were delighted, Commissioner, at the departure of General Guei. If we wish to safeguard our credibility, we must be firm with Laurent Gbagbo in refusing to sanction this dangerous, uncontrollable slide off course. It is no coincidence that the OAU and numerous African Heads of State have condemned the concept of Ivorian identity outright. They know full well that an ethnic or separatist conflict in Côte d'Ivoire could throw the entire region into a state of unrest. Mr President, Commissioner, we must not stand by and watch.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Although these articles and amendments contain some aspects that we approve, we preferred to abstain on this set of amendments, since there are no guarantees on maintaining measures that favour women, such as on the problem of retirement age that exists in some countries or sectors, or even the problems of health precautions. The example of the use that has been made of the principle of equal treatment for men and women to impose night working on women in the industrial sector is enough to arouse suspicion. The principle of equal treatment that the text demands must be clearly demonstrated by aligning with the most favourable regulations for employees of both sexes, and never with those that are less favourable.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Kirkhope report on which we are to vote concerns a German proposal which complements the discussions on drawing up a European policy for the return of illegal residents. Effectively fighting illegal immigration certainly requires a returns policy but returns should, however, be undertaken in a way that respects all people. We would like to mention the fact that the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Charter of Fundamental Rights prohibit collective expulsions. We are calling for an ongoing study of common definitions in the field of refusals of admission and expulsion measures. As regards illegal immigration, we have seen an increase in the number of initiatives by Member States. The many initiatives that are implemented are not harmonised at Community level and are not consistent with each other. We cannot, therefore, respond in a satisfactory manner to the human tragedies that are unfolding on our soil. Member States are adopting punitive measures to facilitate exclusion, but there is not yet a European will to define an immigration policy. It is difficult to make progress in the area of illegal immigration management without having a general framework for legal immigration, which we should already have under the Tampere agenda. For the credibility of the EU in this area we have to respond to the expectations of the public, who no longer understand what is happening with our immigration policies. The Council must continue to press for the adoption of the proposals which remain on the table. The three directives in progress on legal immigration must be adopted as quickly as possible. The proposal for a directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of paid employment and self-employed economic activities was blocked in the Council. That is unacceptable. The proposal for a directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, vocational training or voluntary service has not yet been presented to the Council working group. Just as the proposal for a directive on the short-term residence permit issued to victims of action to facilitate illegal immigration or trafficking in human beings who cooperate with the competent authorities may not be able to be adopted at the Justice and Home Affairs Council at the end of November as planned. We all know, however, that we urgently need this weapon to fight organised crime. If the Council does not move forward on the issue of legal immigration, the degree of harmonisation risks being reduced to the lowest common denominator and any action against illegal immigration will be neither effective nor inclusive.

Political group: PSE
First of all, I should like to thank both our rapporteur in the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Mrs Elisa Maria Damião, and the committee as a whole for the work which they have proposed to us. Everyone is now aware of the significant risks of contracting serious diseases run by those exposed to asbestos, during its manufacture, of course, but also when it has to be handled for removal purposes. It was therefore a matter of urgency to strengthen Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work. It was in this spirit that the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs worked on the proposal tabled by the Commission: our report thus calls for a reduction in asbestos exposure limits for certain activities, in particular demolition, maintenance, repairs and specialised electrical and plumbing work. The report also underlines the need for Member States to introduce dissuasive sanctions against breaches of legislation on removing asbestos. Finally, the report provides for training for workers who are exposed to asbestos. This is an essential initiative and an effective strand of our policy on health and safety in the workplace. (Explanation of vote cut short pursuant to Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PSE
The terrorist threat has assumed global dimensions, requiring a global reaction in order effectively to combat this threat to democracy and the free exercise of human rights. The EU prides itself on its ongoing protection of respect for these fundamental values throughout the world and within Community territory. The rapid and effective EU action in defining its global anti-terrorist strategy (the European Action Plan on Combating Terrorism) is to be praised. The aims of the global EU and Member State Strategy must be: 1 – to reinforce the principles of the rule of law; 2 – to strengthen democratic control – it is regrettable that both the EP and national parliaments have only been partially informed about measures decided on by the Council; 3 – to enhance the means of prevention and suppression of terrorist crimes. It is crucial that the Member States have effective criminal legislation in place and adopt measures for police and judicial cooperation. The area of Freedom, Security and Justice that we are gradually constructing only makes sense if there is a balance between these three components, without any one of them impinging on the others. The tragic events of 11 September 2001 cannot be used to justify excesses or abuses that enable security to suffocate freedom and justice.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I believe that in this debate we must distinguish between two things, as the representative of the Commission has said. Firstly, the genuinely exceptional circumstances in Pakistan and the strategic role it plays in relation to stability in Afghanistan, to the international coalition against terrorism and to the stability of all the countries of Central Asia. However, on the other hand, I do not believe that this fact bears any relation to the internal situation in that country, to the increase in Islamic fundamentalism, the interests and people, our allies, who are being attacked in Afghanistan and the human rights situation in the country. There are horrendous cases such as kidnap, extortion and the captivity of the so-called ‘child jockeys’ and, of course, I am also referring to the result of the evaluation of the elections. Mr Haarder, you know what affection and respect I have had for you since we worked together in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy, but I would like to ask you what the point is in sending a mission of European Union electoral observers, the members of which behave in an exemplary manner at great risk to themselves, to carry out an assessment of the situation which furthermore is shared with other international missions, such as that of the Commonwealth and that of ANFREL, if then the representative of the President-in-Office of the Council fails to authorise it. Do we not already have enough differences in the United Nations Security Council, the General Affairs Council or at European Councils without this further demonstration of disagreement and division? I believe, Madam President, that we must take note of this attitude and work together to prevent any recurrence of this type of situation which presents an image of total fragmentation which, of course, jeopardises the image and prestige of the European Union abroad.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we are often placed in a dilemma when dealing with evil and repugnant regimes. Some will call for dialogue, wanting to point out their concerns and encourage the regime to change its ways. Others – the realists – want tough action and opt for isolation of the regime and sanctions. Every situation is distinct and calls for different measures. It can be said with some confidence that tyrants rarely listen to reason and only respond when their vital interests – often personal – are seriously under threat. The European Union and the wider international community can be powerful bodies when they act with unity, consistency and determination. When they are divided or make seemingly empty threats, sending different messages through other channels, then the tyrant sees no need to respond. We are seeing this with Iraq. Saddam clearly feels – wrongly – that he is being let off the hook. Sometimes tough measures are introduced but there is little resolve in implementing them or there are deliberate efforts to undermine them. We have seen this with Zimbabwe, where the very target of an EU sanctions regime is himself given specific exemption in order to be wined and dined in a European capital. Now we come once more to Burma – another abominable regime – yet another case where the efforts of the European Union and the international community to encourage change have brought few tangible results. We have been at this for years. Parliament has been adopting resolutions and the Council common positions since 1996. What have we to show for all this? Where is the application and the resolve to achieve some real results? Current sanctions against the Burmese regime are due to expire on 29 April. The Council must renew the sanctions but it should strengthen them, introduce new measures, such as an investment ban, remove exemptions to the travel ban and extend it to include all members of the military junta. The sanctions should be rigorously enforced. In addition, I call upon the Commission and the Council to assess why the action so far has been ineffective and make recommendations to remedy the situation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I too would like to thank and congratulate you, although I do not have much to add to what Mr Wurtz has said. I have just one comment to make. We are often told that the composition of Parliament does not accurately reflect our societies, our schools or even our football grounds. It is true that we still lack women and that there are not enough second-generation immigrants. On the other hand, there is a sector, and I would draw your attention to this, where these two categories are more than amply represented, and that is the cleaning staff, the people whose job is to look after our comfort. When one thinks about it – and since you are the President of everybody, I would be grateful if you would take some notice of them as well – one realises that many of the cleaning staff are second generation immigrants. The second thing I would like to say, and I am not entirely joking, is this: you surprised us all by speaking in your native tongue. My own language – I come from Senegal and am a French MEP – is Bambara. I can therefore only hope that I will have just one opportunity before the end of this Parliamentary term to express myself in my capacity as a Member of Parliament in my mother tongue, for that is what we mean by diversity and is also a way of giving each person recognition, for, despite all our differences, we have a future to build together. (Applause)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I rise in order to express my agreement with the comments by Mrs Figueiredo and to endorse her request to the Council and the Commission for explanations about the serious incidents that took place on the border between Portugal and Spain. We must condemn these incidents and draw the necessary conclusions from them. They have upset many people in Portugal and have caused a political storm, and this House cannot remain indifferent to what has occurred in a Member State of the European Union. The right to demonstrate and the freedom of movement are constituent rights of European citizenship and cannot be breached without powerful reasons for doing so and without this House stating its position and protesting.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, EU enlargement is entering its crucial phase. The reports before us and the speeches by Members do not draw a veil over the unresolved issues, but do endorse the candidate countries' accession. Our group also supports this position. The current state of play in the negotiations and in the adoption of the acquis communautaire implies that there are no alternatives. Yet if we look at the quality of integration and the problems arising in the EU itself, it is possible to arrive at a different view. My group, for example, does not believe it is right that, as part of the accession process, candidate countries are urged to join the NATO military alliance. This should not be part of the process, which involves accession to the EU and nothing else. The EU sets conditions for the accession candidates which are not fulfilled by many of its own Member States. There is a tremendous backlog of reform in the EU. The willingness to show solidarity in the distribution of resources is far from overwhelming, and citizens' support for accession has recently been on the wane. Ascribing these problems to ignorance and a lack of transparency is, in our opinion, too simplistic. The citizens' debate on Europe which was called for after Nice has yet to take place in any meaningful way, while the burdens associated with the pre-accession adaptation process are becoming increasingly onerous. The reports quite rightly call upon the candidate countries to adopt more rigorous anti-corruption measures. What is never mentioned, however, are the causes and sources of corruption, which is due, among other things, to capitalist privatisation and the growing social inequalities between a handful of increasingly wealthy people and the vast majority who face poverty and unemployment. The lack of impact of the Commission's strategic positions in the accession process is particularly apparent in agriculture. Anyone who warned early on that some of the elements contained in Agenda 2000 were quite unrealistic was criticised as a troublemaker, but the much-vaunted open 5% have negative and disproportionate repercussions on farmers. Yet anyone who assumes that, with the exception of agricultural policy, the process of enlarging the EU by up to ten states has been resolved is naïve, in my view. Social inequality is present to a far greater extent. There is very limited willingness to show solidarity, and in many areas, the Commission's work is much too superficial and bureaucratic to do justice to the new demands of integration. A considerable number of key issues are unresolved, and what is required is a change of direction. I hope that this will be achieved in good time.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, technological progress over the last decade has indeed revolutionised the audiovisual sector. In any society that respects man and functions to satisfy his diverse material, spiritual and cultural needs, such progress encourages artistic creation to flourish and new forms of expression to develop, making art accessible to all and helping to create a deeper understanding between people from all walks of life. In capitalist societies, however, in both the audiovisual and in other sectors, the beneficial consequences of technological progress are being stifled by the forces controlling it; to wit, by monopolies making profits not by improving the quality of artistic creation, but by controlling the markets, subjecting people to misleading advertising, dictating ideological beliefs and creating specific consumer standards, even for culture. The problem, honourable members, is not just whether films produced in the US or films produced in Europe dominate the European market; the main problem lies with the content and quality of the films that we and our children watch. The European Union treats culture in general and audiovisual media in particular as a commodity, as yet another commercial activity for big business and as a competitive market where the only winners are those who are best equipped to turn the market mechanisms to their advantage, rather than those who have something new or something of a higher quality to offer. This approach is quite evident in the proposal for the MEDIA Plus/MEDIA training programme, from the very first paragraph of the introduction and from Article 1 of the proposal for a decision, which aims to allow professionals in the industry to take full advantage of the European and international dimension of the market. The whole structure has absolutely nothing to do with the needs of the people of the European Union or with culture; on the contrary it serves those interests which benefit from the commercialisation of culture.

Political group: GUE-NGL