GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Commissioner, I am sorry to return to this issue which is constantly being repeated, but there is currently enormous confusion in Spain. The Spanish Government, without going any further, with the famous and recently approved Júcar-Vinalopó project, also created a problem in terms of its identity and where the water from the Ebro could not go, within the Júcar-Vinalopó project, and I had to ask the Commissioner a question – and I am extremely grateful to her for having replied to me. In this case, however, we return to the same problem. You are aware of the serious problems in Spain of a social and, possibly, environmental nature. What would happen if, once the work is finished, you, without considering economic factors or funds, simply do not comply with European legislation? What will we do in that case? Put all the work back to its original state, with all the expense that that would entail? We would therefore like to ask you whether you believe it makes more sense for the Commission to ask the Spanish Government to suspend any actions relating to the Spanish National Hydrological Plan, in a precautionary fashion, until the Commission has taken a decision?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say something about the general lines on the agencies, which I have agreed with the general rapporteur in my capacity as permanent rapporteur on the agencies’ budget. Apart from one small change, we have, in dealing with this year’s agencies budget, followed the Commission proposal and have, as a rule, reinstated the Commission’s preliminary draft budget in order to take into account the agencies’ increased requirements in consequence of enlargement. It should be noted in this regard that some agencies have done very well out of this, whilst the reinstatement of the preliminary draft budget has meant that others have not received the funding they need in order to successfully complete the tasks allocated to them. We must nonetheless hold fast to the principle that it is the budget that determines activities and not the other way round. It is not acceptable for the administrative boards or managers of agencies to exceed their budgets without obtaining approval for this from the Commission or the budgetary authority. As regards the agencies’ establishment plan and Mr Mulder’s proposal concerning it, I would like to point out that Parliament, being part of the budgetary authority, must get better at monitoring the agencies’ personnel policies, to which certain principles must apply. Firstly, and as a rule, the agency must, when recruiting staff, use the procedures generally customary in the EU. Secondly, when recruiting specialised staff, who can only be allocated to higher grades, approval must be sought from the budgetary authority in each individual case. Thirdly, agencies must not grant established official status without the budgetary authority’s permission. The object of this is to enable us to eventually get some sort of grip on the expansion of personnel and the inflation of costs. As the Member States have already announced their intention to set up even more agencies, we can see even today that this will go beyond the scope of category 3. I would ask the Commissioner to join with her fellow-Commissioners in giving some thought to whether it might not make sense to establish a category specifically for the agencies, enabling control of them to be improved and made transparent, and also guaranteeing Parliament’s right of co-determination.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, LIFE has been the principal instrument available to the Community since 1992 for supporting and developing environmental policy, both within the Community and in the surrounding third countries. On the basis of the experience gained over the past eight years, an attempt is being made to increase the effectiveness of action on behalf of the environment in the third development phase of that financial instrument. The funding of activities for the implementation, adaptation and development of Community policy in the environment sector and the incorporation of the environment in other policies, particularly ones that contribute towards sustainable development, are central elements of the regulation we are to vote upon. An important element of LIFE-Nature, which mainly concerns the realisation of the Natura 2000 network, is the introduction of a multinational approach to formulating plans for international projects and activities, so as to avoid the fragmentation of biotopes and to offer better protection of biodiversity. In the second, LIFE-Environment strand, which is more concerned with projects involving small and medium-sized enterprises and local government agencies, the incorporation of the environment in other policies is expressed very clearly indeed. As regards the financing package for the implementation of LIFE over the next five years, I wholeheartedly support the increase from EUR 613 million to EUR 850 million proposed by the rapporteur, Mrs Lienemann. Unless the necessary means are secured to pursue environmental protection, there is no point on the one hand in continuing to raise the environmental awareness achieved in recent years, and on the other hand in incorporating the environmental dimension in other policies. Besides, we cannot remain indifferent towards the increased challenges in areas around the Union or towards addressing very acute environmental protection problems in the applicant countries. What has happened over the past few days with the pollution of the Danube and its tributary has been instructive. Consequently, I consider that support for environmental action under the LIFE financial instrument will help to further Community policy in the environmental sector and can contribute substantially to fulfilling the Community’s mission of achieving a high level of environmental protection and improvement.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we can very often be proud of the work that we – as distinct from the Council and the Member States, for example – do to turn the Lisbon agenda into a reality. We cannot, however, be particularly proud of our work on this occasion. Since the Commission put forward its proposal, it has taken us 22 months to arrive at the first reading and, just as Mr Harbour stated earlier, clarification is required to prevent those of our fellow MEPs who are less familiar with our procedures from being confused during the vote. I wish to support a lot of what Mrs Gebhardt said in her speech. At the same time, I wish to take the opportunity to congratulate her on her birthday next week. We cannot perhaps all be with you, but I hope that you have a splendid day and that we can hear all about it. Listening to the debate on these issues, you often get the feeling that every country has the world’s best education system. One of the biggest advantages of being here in the European Parliament is perhaps that of learning a certain humility in this respect. I have deliberately devoted a lot of time to the Committee on Petitions, which also deals with citizens’ complaints, because I agree with Mr MacCormick that there are problems for different types of teacher, something that also applies to crane operators from different countries. I myself have, for example, worked for a long time with a crane operator, Mr Holmström, from the Swedish-speaking Åland Islands. He has not succeeded in obtaining recognition in Finland for the crane operator’s examination he took in Sweden. Nyland’s worker protection district has always opposed his doing so, and I believe that many of you are surprised that there are such problems between Finland and Sweden, two countries that nonetheless have a very great deal in common with each other. This is an example of how people believe that they themselves have the best education system of all. At the same time as wishing to thank the Commission for its proposal for a new directive in the field of the internal market and services, I wish to sound a word of warning. We must not again act in a way that makes it simpler for companies than for individuals to move across our borders. Far too often, the result of our action is that individuals are not given access to freedom of movement and the internal market in the way that we should desire. As we heard earlier, our group will support the Commission’s proposal in many respects. We also want to have a flexible directive but, unlike some of the other groups, we do not want the annexes to form part of the text. I am, however, pleased to see that regulations concerning language requirements are being introduced that are more precise than those put forward by the Commission.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, Commissioner, it is late, and I shall be brief. I am delighted with this report. My thanks to the Commissioner for what she has just said. I am delighted that my proposed amendments were accepted by everyone in the Committee on the Environment. My thanks also to my friend Mr Nisticò, even if there is one question we disagree on. I think it is morally reprehensible to take primates from the wild. If we feel we cannot do without them, then we must breed them. I come from a country where we would no longer dare keep such animals in a zoo, not even the Schönbrunner Zoo, the oldest and most beautiful zoo in the world. The last time a pharmaceutical company dared to bring two chimpanzees to Austria from Africa, they were rescued. They now live, much beloved by the public, as Liesl and Hiasl in an animal rescue centre in Vienna. As one famous English legal practitioner once said, you do not ask yourself, can animals think, can animals talk? No, you ask yourself, can they suffer? And that they certainly can.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, you have taken a decision: we must continue with the same method of voting, despite the fact that we do not agree. I would now ask, for the purposes of political assessment, that this vote be postponed until 12.30 p.m. (Protests)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, although I feel it is legitimate for Mr Hume to raise a practical issue, the need to improve air connections, and I support his request, I also find it shocking that a Member of Parliament should challenge the right to strike in the countries of the European Union. I would point out that this case is not specific to France. On 13 May, Austria experienced its first national strike in fifty years, on the same subject: pension protection. I welcome this. If we want to remedy the mistrust that currently separates the European institutions from the citizens, therefore, we should not follow Mr Evans’ bad example. Quite the opposite, we should show solidarity with our fellow citizens.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I am glad that we are having a debate on this subject. It is very reassuring that so many colleagues have taken such an interest in aquaculture. This must be the best attended fisheries debate on record. It is vital that we recognise the importance of this very young and growing sector. Seven thousand jobs are reliant on aquaculture in Scotland, 75% of them in the highlands and islands, and often aquaculture provides a lifeline for some of our most remote communities. Salmon accounts for nearly 40% of Scottish food exports and Atlantic salmon farming is now worth more to the Scottish economy in financial terms than cattle and sheep farming combined. The report talks positively about the industry and future objectives. We need to consider long–term secure employment in the sector and to ensure product availability for consumers and an environmentally sound industry. Sustainable development has to be the watchword. The report looks at the importance of food safety and hygiene and also of research into alternatives rather than antibiotics. We also need to address some of the key problems affecting the industry. The most recent has been unfair competition. The Commission has already been dealing with the issue of salmon dumping from Chile, Norway and the Faroe Islands and an investigation is ongoing in the Trade Directorate–General. The disclosure documents which were published on 20 December 2002, with a deadline of 8 January 2003, initially made it impossible for the European Salmon Producers Group to comment, due to Christmas and the New Year. However, I am pleased that the Commission has given salmon producers more time to provide a response. It is critical that their voice is heard and I hope the Commission will ensure that Parliament and the Fisheries Committee are kept informed of the progress of this inquiry, especially as the estimated level of dumping by Chile is 29.7%, in direct contravention of fair trade. We must make sure that these unfair practices stop. I hope the Parliament will endorse this report and support aquaculture.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, any objective observer of the situation in Yugoslavia is compelled to conclude that the criminals continue to move about scot-free while their victims are locked up in prison. For all our delight at the changes in Belgrade, we still have to press for the earliest possible release of these victims. This has nothing to do with an amnesty, because it stands to reason that an amnesty can only be granted to prisoners who have been justly convicted; what we are demanding is quite simply the release of unjustly convicted people. That may be linked with an amnesty, or their release may precede the amnesty. It is my view that the political prisoners, not least the many hundreds of Albanians, must be released without delay. I also appeal to President Kostunica to find out what happened to people such as Mr Ukshin Hoti, with whose fate we have concerned ourselves on several occasions here without ever obtaining any information on his whereabouts. So there is a need to investigate the fate of those who were abducted, whether they were murdered or whether they are still being held somewhere. All those who are being illegally detained or who are in prison for political reasons must be released without delay. That is the first step towards the establishment of the rule of law. I do have to say that this is not much to ask in return for the substantial aid which the European Union has already pledged. We expect action as soon as the elections are over.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I too welcome the work done by Mr Cunha in the Committee on Agriculture. As an aside, it was stated that Andalusia is a very rich agricultural area. I have to say that I would be delighted with an income from agriculture as high as that enjoyed by the citizens represented by Mrs Auroi, and so would my Andalusian constituents. I side with those in favour of retaining aid to farmers, although I do not smoke myself and advise everyone not to take it up or to stop. I believe it would be a mistake to reduce the cultivation of tobacco or do away with it altogether. My reasons are that this would entail a high social cost and that no suitable alternative crops have been identified. It should also be remembered that those who advocate cutting off aid to the sector on the grounds of health protection fail to take into account that subsidising European production would have no impact on consumption. This is because the European Union imports 70% of its raw tobacco. Nonetheless, we have already been presented with a proposal providing for gradual elimination of tobacco without the relevant studies to ensure alternative sources of income following replacement of this crop. There are no such alternative sources of income at present. Discussion of reform can only begin when the results of assessment of the COM in tobacco are available, not in any event before 2003. The Commission aims to replace agricultural research with action to support the development of specific initiatives encouraging tobacco producers to change to other crops and engage in alternative economic activities generating employment. Deductions from the producers’ premiums are to be implemented progressively starting in 2004. The Community Fund financed by deductions from the subsidies has been underused. This was due to serious mismanagement by the Commission. If the latter handled the existing budget so badly, I have grave misgivings as to whether it would do better with a significantly larger sum. It should be recalled that there have hardly been any calls to tender so far. The Fund must of course continue to serve its purpose and pursue research into varieties more suited to demand and causing as little harm as possible. Obviously it must also investigate alternative uses for raw tobacco and its environmental impact. Increased deductions should not be an excuse for covert reductions of the producers’ premiums. I should like to conclude by emphasising the important social and economic role played by tobacco cultivation. It calls for a sizeable workforce on family plots. The debate on tobacco and public health should not therefore be restricted to the agricultural context, targeting the weakest link in the chain of tobacco production.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I welcome the remarkable work and flexible, astute approach of our rapporteur, Mr Liese, who, from a somewhat rigid starting position, from strong ethical principles, has endeavoured to achieve, with the support not only of myself but of the entire Group, as balanced a compromise as possible on a very sensitive subject, the use of human embryos and human embryonic stem cells in research projects under the Sixth Framework Programme. As a research scientist, of course, I can only support the progress of science, in the primary interest of patients who have, for years, been placing their hope in new technologies, as has been said, which may provide a cure for or control debilitating, sometimes irreversible diseases such as Parkinson’s disease, spinal lesions which can cause paraplegia, tetraplegia, Alzheimer’s’ disease and so on. That is why I want to thank Commissioner Busquin for his prolific efforts to achieve what is, without a doubt, a difficult compromise. I have to say that, recently, at the specific request of the Italian Minister for Scientific Research, the Italian bioethics committee, chaired by Professor Francesco D’Agostino concluded that it was ethically legitimate to remove stem cells for therapeutic purposes from embryos which can no longer be implanted. The decision that we will be called upon to take in this Chamber only concerns the funding of the Sixth Framework Programme and, therefore, relates to a fairly short period of time. However, I have good reasons for thinking that the amendment adopted by the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, which provides for the funding of research using supernumerary cells, will not be unanimously endorsed by the Council, with the risk of a minority block and the extension of the current moratorium. This would be even more damaging to public research in Europe, which would remain in its current state of uncertainty and lack of regulation. This is why I drew up a new compromise proposal, in order to find some common ground between scientific demands and ethical principles: indeed, my proposal – put forward by the Group, moreover – on the one hand, bans the funding of research projects which provide for the use of human supernumerary embryos, and, on the other, allows research scientists to use in experiments stem cells and stem cell lines from human embryos which are already available in laboratories and which were taken from supernumerary embryos before 27 June 2002. I feel that, only in this way, can we make it possible for research scientists to proceed with preliminary comparative investigations, which are essential for the purposes of the future use – or non-use – of embryonic stem cells. I therefore hope that reason will prevail over emotion and prejudice in tomorrow’s vote in this Chamber, in the higher interest of patients’ health.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, in my opinion, Robert J. Evans’s report is very important and I voted in favour of it. The right of freedom of movement of European citizens is still being violated in many ways. Students in particular often encounter barriers and difficulties in Member States that should no longer occur under EU legislation. Studies by the European Commission show that needless red tape is causing problems for students from other EU countries. Residence permits are granted for just short periods of time and it is awkward and costly to renew them. There are some unfortunate situations. In Spain students are required to deposit – in a Spanish bank account, note – special sums of money that act as a guarantee in order to rent accommodation. It is also complicated to arrange for students’ families to move. Recently it came out that certain estate agents handling rented accommodation in London would not accept a foreign, for example, a Finnish, guarantor that ensured the Finnish student’s rent would be paid. European rights of citizenship do not seem to carry much weight in this situation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, my group's attitude towards the Commission's attempts in this area is rather different from that of the previous speaker. Indeed, if we were to criticise the Commission, we would criticise it rather from the other side; we would hope that the Commission would take a rather more robustly liberal attitude, for example in the proposals which it has made for a directive on occupational pension funds, to remove the possibility of certain Member States deciding to continue to implement quantitative restrictions for which there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any superior performance. The Commission should generally adopt the guiding principle that it should at least be capable of putting forward some evidence in favour of its proposals, rather than merely going for something which appears to be no better than the average practice in those Member States where the prudent person principle is adopted. We also take a different view in urging the Commission and our colleagues in Parliament to try to make progress in taxation coordination. While that is a very desirable aim, we should not allow the best to become the enemy of the good. If we can make progress in improving the returns for pensioners in private schemes across the European Union, we should do so. There is, as I have already said, absolutely no evidence that there is any reduction in safety or security as a result, and to establish an entirely spurious linkage, whereby we wait until we have a perfect scheme for taxation before we attempt to make some progress in the area of opening up and liberalising asset management seems to me to be very unfortunate. We also welcome the Commission's new stress on coordination rather than on legislation. We know that it is perfectly possible for the Commission to make many proposals, as it has done in the past, without making very much progress. This is a new approach and I hope that it will be more successful than the approach of some of the Commissioner's predecessors in this area.

Political group: ELDR