GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, it would appear important not to confuse the situation in Chechnya with the situation that has developed after 11 September. Clearly, the Russians have a tendency to lump together what is happening on the various chessboards of the world – in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Chechnya and Georgia – as if it were all part of the same phenomenon, which it is not. The Russians often appear to be the most avid readers of those geopolitical experts who predict conflict between the Islamic and Christian civilisations, some ideological gymnastics being necessary here in respect of the positions they held not so long ago. In my opinion, we too make mistakes every now and again. For instance, when the European institutions label the Chechen guerrillas ‘bandits’ and ‘terrorists’, it is impossible to imagine being able to hold a dialogue with bandits and terrorists. Therefore, I would look for a single term to define this section of the fighters, who have strong support from the Chechen people. Given that the European position overall is much more complex, we need expert observers on the ground to counteract attempts to oversimplify the situation locally. I therefore wholeheartedly welcome Lord Judd’s mission; I wholeheartedly welcome the proposal to set up troikas, or quintuples I should say, with the Russian opposition party and the Working Group on Chechnya, to monitor the situation and investigate the violations of human rights; it would appear appropriate, in addition, to set up an ad hoc delegation for the Northern Caucasus to discuss all the current issues with the Russians and Chechen representatives. All this is very positive: it means that we will, at least, be present. In essence, the resolution we are discussing today calls, for the most part, upon the Russians to help the victims, to accept the setting-up of monitoring committees and groups and to assist and cooperate with those who work for humanitarian organisations and need permits, visas and protection in order to be able to do their jobs. In hoping for the return of 200 000 refugees, Parliament is, of course, doing no more than just expressing a nice idea. It all depends, then, on goodwill, on the willingness of the Putin Government to accept what are essentially implicit criticisms of the current situation in Chechnya – for otherwise it would not be necessary to send so many delegations. We will be able to measure the extent to which Russia intends to establish good working relations with the European Union from its willingness to accept these invitations.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, since we still have some money left, I would like to remind Mr Prodi of the earthquakes in Greece. I noticed that he listened with some compassion and made some notes, perhaps to remind himself to include the issue in his rejoinder. It is a good opportunity, now that we have time, to hear Mr Prodi’s thoughts on a matter which has scarred the whole population of a Member State of the European Union.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I just want to take advantage of your welcome to the delegation by pointing out that the House also has the pleasure of welcoming the heads of the Austrian anti-racist associations who are honouring us with a visit. (Applause) (The sitting was suspended at 11.50 a.m. for a formal sitting on the occasion of an address by Mr Vaclav Havel, President of the Czech Republic and resumed at 12.50 p.m.) (1)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the future presents both threats and opportunities. Biotechnology and life sciences are areas which arouse both fear and enthusiasm. There is good reason not to rush into believing that these offer solutions to all the problems we see before us. At the same time, we should not be frightened simply because we do not have the answers to all the questions. The Union has highlighted life sciences as an area which will help to make Europe the most knowledge-based and competitive economy. Used correctly, biotechnology can offer solutions to many of the problems we will all face. In order to counter the threats to the environment, we need not only restrictions in our lives but also new discoveries which can help us tackle the threats to the environment technically, mechanically and biologically. In this context, biotechnology offers many opportunities. The fight against poverty and famine in the developing countries requires various initiatives in order to succeed. We should not overestimate biotechnology, but nor should we underestimate it. Crops which tolerate different temperatures and levels of drought and rainfall may help to ensure that there is food in areas which currently experience famine. A society which seeks to develop prosperity and justice, and which wants more and more people to be able to live in acceptable environments must ensure economic growth. Many mature industries are failing today, which means we need new ones. Biotechnology is one such and one of the most promising. Let us within the Community invest common resources in order to continue developing together and moving forward. It is not enough to state that we have to be successful, we must also act. This involves adopting Mrs Damião’s report – positive action which bodes well for the future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I too should like to make a complaint. I have been trying to make a point of order for the last ten minutes. It is not right of you to lump all of us sitting up here in the last two rows together and to refuse to acknowledge points of order. I wanted to point out that the German translation was, unfortunately, lost in the commotion. It makes no sense to turn the public address system in the House up so loud that we can no longer hear anything over our headphones. That is my first point. On my second point, I should like to ask that the seating arrangements be changed in future. If you look at the seating plan, you will see that the four members of the PPE group up here in the last two rows are sitting between other groups. It is not a very happy arrangement and it should be changed, especially in view of what has happened here today.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission is proposing a fundamental amendment to the directive on preventing money laundering. Since the 1991 directive was adopted many external factors have changed. Firstly, we have had experience with the existing directive and secondly, we need to take account of the changes in the Treaties. Given the growing awareness that money is the main objective and driving force behind organised crime, appropriate measures also need to be taken which target the profits from organised crime. The financial interests of the Community also fall victim to organised crime, as the reports about combating fraud in the Commission show. This is to the detriment of the budget of the European Communities. The Member States protect their financial interests in accordance with their laws, but the Communities do not have a police force or judicial authorities with which to bring defrauders before a judge so as to recover the lost money and impose punishments. That is why the Community budget needs to be protected by means of directives, regulations and other measures. Article 280 of the EC Treaty clearly states that, “The Community and the Member States shall counter fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Community through measures to be taken in accordance with this Article, which shall act as a deterrent and be such as to afford effective protection...”. The Commission proposal should be seen in close connection with this article of the Treaty. Most of the crime which harms the Community budget is also organised crime. The rapporteur is right there. But there are also exceptions. Furthermore it is not always international organised crime, and here the Committee on Budgetary Control would have preferred the Commission proposal. However, we do recognise the delimitation problems and, if there is simply a reference to Article 280 of the Treaty, we are prepared to go along with the rapporteur. Incidentally, we believe that the money laundering directive is firstly about prevention and providing a deterrent and secondly about gathering evidence. The Member States need to have a legal base for their own and the Union’s sakes. All appropriate evidence ought to be used to punish fraud and other illegal activities which are to the detriment of the EU budget. It would certainly be in line with the Presidency Conclusions of the October 1999 European Council to proceed in this way. I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Lehne, for the cooperation which we have enjoyed.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I first wish to thank my Swedish colleagues, Göran Färm and Per Stenmarck, for their excellent reports. Strengthening the guidelines for budgetary procedure is the first step in the drafting of next year’s budget. My group stresses the importance of strict budgetary discipline. This means that the budget should not include unnecessary appropriations and that economy should be a feature of financial management. Proper budgeting leads to a decrease in payment arrears and promotes the implementation of budgeted programmes. In this respect the figures in recent years have been disheartening. In the year 2000, EUR 8.5 billion in appropriations were unused, and last year the amount was as much as EUR 12 billion. The situation is therefore alarming. In no way does this reflect rigorous financial management: it is symptomatic of poor administration. The Commission is unable to implement those areas of policy that Parliament has held to be important and for which it has authorised appropriations. As a result, areas of policy are implemented unsatisfactorily, while at the same time the arrears – the unpaid commitments – grow. There is no such massive degree of underutilisation in the administration of any Member State’s budget. For that reason our group not only supports budgetary discipline but is also strongly in favour of the Commission’s programme of reform. This is lent additional weight by the recent so-called new disclosures in the Commission’s administration. The matter of personal accountability must be clarified and the power of decision-making delegated downwards in the organisation. Accountability and result-oriented management are the key words here. There are special requirements associated with enlargement. The budget for 2003 may be the last one drafted for a Union of 15 Member States. In this regard our group also believes that the appropriations connected with enlargement are absolutely crucial. I wish the rapporteurs for the budget every success in their future work.

Political group: ELDR
Although I voted in favour of the report I would like to make it very clear that I am opposed to the text of paragraph 16 and that I regret that it was adopted. The request for OLAF offices to be opened in the candidate countries before the end of June seems to me to be at the very least absurd and bordering on an insult to the candidate countries. Moreover, it is impossible to comply with. There are no offices in the current Member States either, nor is it known what powers OLAF may have outside the EU apart from inspecting our own offices. In short, it is nonsense that the report did not deserve.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we have tabled an oral amendment which would mean adding to recital H: “Whereas the European Parliament nonetheless regrets that some participants have not agreed to join this agreement and invites all the Congolese parties to take responsibility and to respect the framework established in the Lusaka agreements and the United Nations resolutions”. This amendment reflects the idea that was expressed in the debate, on which I think there was a consensus among the other groups. It would mean copying everything that was said by the European Union about Sun City, as in the resolution only the first part was copied. (Parliament accepted the oral amendment) - paragraph 5:

Political group: PSE
Madam President, there has just been some enthusiastic applause because this vote has ended. I can understand why, as this is always a protracted event. However, I would like to ask you to put one other amendment to the vote. I should have said this at the beginning, but we were already proceeding with the voting. It is about the Court of Auditors. We have now voted on an amount of 1 million in the line to build an extension for the Court of Auditors. As the Committee on Budgets, we would like to ask for another EUR 6 million to be entered in the reserve so that additional capital can be injected during the coming year. This will ultimately produce considerable savings for the taxpayer and will also create extra scope in future budgets. I would also like to ask you to put this last amendment to the vote, which entails entering a further EUR 6 million in the reserve in budget line 206. (Parliament gave its assent) *** Report (A5-0330/2001) by Mr Costa Neves, on behalf of the Committee on Budgets, on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2002 (C5-0300/2001 – 2000/2324(BUD)) and Letter of amendment No 1/2002 (12733/2001 – C5-0495/2001) to the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2002 (Section III – Commission) Following the vote

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I wish to welcome the Communication from the Commission on the reform of state-owned enterprises in developing countries. I wish, however, at the same time to regret the generally negative attitude to free enterprise and private ownership that emerges in the draft report. The high living standards and prosperity achieved by the western world, Japan and Australia are not the results of monopoly and protectionism but of the free market economy’s and private enterprise’s many dynamic forces that promote development and prosperity. In Europe, this state of affairs has been particularly clear. Half our continent has tried another method involving centralised control and large state monopolies. The inefficiency and collapse of monopoly socialism in Europe has been the experience of many European peoples and has provided them with a bitter lesson. It is a lesson that we ought, indeed have an obligation to, pass on to countries that wish to construct democratic welfare societies. The developing countries must be given the same opportunity to develop and create an economic model involving free competition and an open market economy. It is not the EU’s task to try to prevent a development towards competition that will bring prosperity in its wake. It is not too much in the way of a market economy that has been the big problem in the developing countries. On the contrary, the problem has been too little in the way of free economies and too much in the way of monopolies, something that has led to mismanagement, corruption and stagnation. I fully share the view concerning people’s need for clean water, efficient drainage, elementary health care and medical treatment, basic education and access to energy. It is not, however, the form of ownership in itself that is the most important thing, but a high degree of flexibility and efficiency in delivering these services. Competition is very important in this area. The developing countries naturally need regulations that provide a legal framework, and perhaps this is an area in which the EU can be of great help to the developing countries. Current political solutions in many developing countries are, unfortunately, often ineffective and expensive and only reach a limited proportion of the population. Those developing countries that have succeeded in taking the step from poverty to wealth and prosperity have all given priority to competition and efficiency, not centralised state control and the building of monopolies.

Political group: PPE-DE
I welcome this report which seeks to improve the delivery of EU assistance to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia by simplifying the decision-making procedures and making them more transparent. - Garot Report (A5-0305/2000)

Political group: PSE
Madam President, allow me to add my congratulations on your first debate in which so many Dutch people have taken the floor. This sentiment is also shared by the Christian Democratic Appeal as the largest delegation in the largest group. The request is logical in my view. The matter has been reassigned, something which Mr Nobilia was not aware of. It is an important report and it seems that we are doing the right thing. I do not believe that this is the right time to conduct a proper debate, nor is this the right way. We have to postpone it. It is not necessary to reach a vote at all cost today. That is why we support this request.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mrs Matikainen-Kallström’s report deserves our full support. She has guided this ‘child’ in difficult circumstances, for which I thank her. When we talk of transitional economies we might ask where these economies are really going. It seems that the direction is not always clear. Moldova imports all its raw materials from abroad and is very dependent on energy imports. One tenth of its GNP goes on a bill from just one Russian company, Gazprom, which – as the previous speaker said – is switching out the lights in the state of Moldova. There is therefore a stranglehold on energy that does not just affect Moldova but also its neighbour, Ukraine; and Belarus, too, for that matter. Consequently, this phenomenon has a broader political significance, which may create tension in this region, and which we will then have to attempt to relieve. Moldova’s need for finance will be huge in the years to come. The Russian crisis on 17 August 1998 had an enormous effect on Moldova. It has become a ragamuffin state. The basic pension is just one fifth of the heating costs of one small flat. No nation can live and function like that. The balance of trade surplus is a massive 23 – 25%. As has been said, Russian troops are in the region of Trans-Dnestr, Lebed’s famous 14th army, not all of it, but nonetheless it has some influence. We obviously support the loan decision and the line the report adopts, the macro-financial assistance, but this will not be enough. We are taking stability eastwards, so that we will not have to import instability from there. The next zone of enlargement, the following zone of candidate countries, will be the one we shall have to concentrate on. We have to create an area of special action, of which Moldova will be a part, and we have to help them. We therefore have to create an Eastern programme, to run alongside the current round of enlargement, which will help these countries – Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia – at a stage when we are receiving new members, so that no new curtain falls between these states.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, last night I was in Strasbourg, as many of us were. I was with a Member of Parliament, whom I will not mention by name – it starts with an S – and two beautiful European Parliament officials, whom I will not name either – V and T – one blond and the other brunette, and we gazed at the starry sky of Strasbourg and tried to pick out the constellations. You will not believe this, Mr President, but at one point, the Member who was with me said: ‘What a beautiful starry sky! How can we bear not to protect the environment through criminal law too and preserve the beauty of nature for ever? Tomorrow, therefore, we must vote for this document.’ President. – Thank you, Mr Fatuzzo, for your indirect quotation of the great Kant.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, two weeks ago an interparliamentary conference on the human rights situation in China was held at the European Parliament in Brussels. We Members of the European Parliament agreed, together with the Foreign Minister of the Tibetan government in exile, the US government official responsible for Tibet and members of national parliaments, that it is time we put an end to shady compromises with China for the sake of maintaining purely economic relations. The Chinese are still refusing to enter into a constructive dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and political repression is on the increase. People are being mercilessly persecuted, and religious freedom and freedom of speech are being curbed. Tibet’s culture and identity are being systematically obliterated. These continual violations of the most fundamental human rights must now become an issue. The United States needs the support of the European Union at the 56th UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. The European Union must use its inherent authority to work for human dignity and minority rights. If it takes the first step, other countries, including the candidate countries, will certainly follow suit. My own group, the Group of the , is firmly convinced of this. Commissioner Lamy, Europe needs to stick its head above the parapet. The Commission and the Council belong at the head of a movement fully supporting the Dalai Lama’s five-point peace plan. Point one: Tibet must become a peace zone. Point two: China must finally renounce its policy of expulsion. Point three: democratic civil rights must be guaranteed for all minorities. Point four: Tibet’s culture and environment must be protected. Point five: genuine negotiations must take place on Tibet’s future autonomous status. Commissioner, all our economic agreements with third countries need to be based on the same premise: respect for human rights. You demonstrated in Seattle, Commissioner Lamy, and I was there to see for myself, that you know how to build bridges. How did a Tibetan delegate put it? “We will survive because of your moral support, but above all because of your solidarity”! Tashi delek!

Political group: PPE-DE