GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I shall not comment on what the previous speaker said; I shall merely say that it is inconceivable to me that such reasoning should be heard in this House. I should like to ask you to allow me to inform the House about a number of serious infringements which I noticed during my recent visit to Estonia and Lithuania. In Estonia, as in Latvia, although half the population is Russian or Russian-speaking, the Russian language is not recognised as an official language. Public-sector services, courts and laws are all in a language of which they have an inadequate command. In addition, they are denied the nationality of the country in which they and their fathers were born. They are made to sit humiliating and highly specialised examinations in language, the constitution and history, which very few are able to pass. The universities and schools are closed to Russian. In all three Baltic States, the communist parties are banned and their cadres persecuted. In Lithuania, the leaders of the Communist Party of Lithuania, Mikolas Burakevicius and Koulalis, have been in prison for ten years on prefabricated charges under a law passed long after they were arrested. This and much more goes on in the Baltic and in other former accession countries, despite assurances to the contrary by Mr Verheugen, who has repeatedly expressed his support for these flagrant violations. I should like to draw your attention to a letter containing specific facts ... (The President cut off the speaker)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I too would first like to thank the rapporteurs for producing successful reports. These reports focus on essential factors to improve maritime safety and there is still much to do in this sector. To minimise accidents the identification of vessels must be improved, the obligation to notify must be extended and procedures for transferring and using information must be simplified and attention must also be paid to differing circumstances. The grounds for compensation for damage must observe the principles of the international system on which the Commission’s proposal is also based. The circle of people entitled to compensation and the accidents for which compensation is payable must not be extended. However, those suffering from oil damage must receive full compensation for the loss caused by the damage. The European oil pollution compensation fund is not the only way of solving problems. Solutions should initially be sought at international level and the oil industry must also take part in financing the fund. The maritime safety agency to be set up must support Member States and the Commission in applying Community legislation. The field of operations drawn up for the agency is quite broad so good cooperation with Member States is important. The representation of various bodies on the board is not, however, essential as their points of view will be taken into account by other means. Besides tightening up the regulations, care must be taken that the decisions made are realistic and capable of being carried out. My group sees it as important that the proposals are approved quickly and we make progress on safety issues. I would finally like to draw attention to the fact that solutions to improve maritime safety carried out only within the Union are insufficient. For example, issues of responsibility must be addressed at global level.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, it is commonly accepted that European cultural diversity is closely linked to linguistic diversity, which makes a significant contribution to our very perception of the world, to expression and creativity. This is something which is also included in the draft Constitutional Treaty and we are particularly satisfied with that. Maintaining linguistic diversity, as expressed through support for lesser-used languages, contributes, apart from anything else, to social cohesion, to preventing conflicts and, of course, should not in my opinion operate along lines of quantitative parameters, along lines of majorities and minorities. I take the same view of minority languages. They have an intrinsic value and should be dealt with as such. There are in fact millions of Europeans who, alongside the official language of their country, speak a minority language, mainly within their communities, and this is a tradition from generation to generation which we all respect. That is why it is important for cultural ties to be used creatively for the purpose of communication and exchanges and not, of course, to isolate a community; this would be particularly negative and we have seen it happen in the past. It is therefore important for our strategies as regards minority languages to be characterised by an open spirit of cooperation, by scientific research and association with the wealth of cultural elements which surround them. Promoting cultural cooperation and exchanges is the best way of offering the public the area of European culture we all want to create. In the present era of globalisation, concentration of resources and the prevalence of monolingual situations, maintaining minority languages must be addressed as a source of primary elements which have the freshness and verve to claim their expression over time, despite their limited extent. However, it should be stressed that it is only by opening these cultural communities up to dialogue that we shall find a fruitful solution. That is why I think that the Commission study is important and we await its results with great interest.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, you certainly have to hand it to the United States these days. They are facing the greatest constitutional crisis they have had in a hundred years and all they keep saying is that their being able to have such a crisis shows how well-designed their system is. If we could only take a leaf out of their book, i.e. put a little less emphasis on the things that are going wrong in our part of the world, and a little more emphasis on the things that are going well, then we would be a good deal happier than we are now. I agree with everyone who has said that the Council must be put to the test. I also have my doubts. I hope they actually do what Elmar Brok has advised them to do. If they follow his advice then they will make a success of it. If they do not, then they will fail. It is particularly important, to my mind, for social policy and the Charter to be recognised in the Treaty by some means or other. But why is it that we always think we are doing so much worse than others are, even though there are no objective reasons for this? I think that to some extent it is down to a certain insecurity on the part of Parliament, and also on the part of the Council and the Commission, when it comes to putting across the message, but on the other hand, it is also a sure fire consequence of the below the belt attacks launched by the so-called ‘sceptics’. They have nothing to offer. What they offer is a Balkans type scenario, which is the worst thing imaginable. The Balkans is the sceptics’ ideal. To hear Mr Bonde talk, the Balkans is his ultimate ideal. We can expect no better of him. If we then see that these people have absolutely no alternative, would only bring us misery and would bring our industry into a much worse state than it is at present, then far too much notice is being taken of them. I feel it is also up to the Council to try to act not just for the sake of national interests but also for the sake of the common European interest, because united we stand, divided we fall, and we had better not forget it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I believe in a common strategy which must be monitored from within Europe. I think that the Lisbon Summit has given us a new impulse in this respect. This is important and these are aspects which one would expect from a Summit. But it goes without saying that the merit of this Summit, at which so many good intentions were formulated and which is also based on an excellent analysis, will be judged on the action taken subsequently. Because a number of the matters which were brought together at the Summit – as, in fact, happened – had been formulated previously by the Commission. The e-commerce document springs to mind, for example. This is an existing document. Another example is the intention to draft a legislative frame for pension funds. This intention was formulated a long time ago. In addition to the positive aspects of summits such as these, I would also like to make room for some criticism. These summits try to build a momentum – and it is important that they do so – but this momentum caves in because so little action is taken subsequently, as a result of which people no longer believe in the next momentum. The press now writes that the most important element of the Lisbon Summit was that it actually took place, nothing else. This is very serious. The content of the Summit was not bad, but faith in subsequent action is evidently ebbing and this is a very serious matter indeed. I would like to list three elements which are lacking in my opinion. Firstly, fiscal integration, which has been talked about for so long. In order to take action in the economic field, fiscal integration is required. Secondly, social security. There should be a convergence programme, a kind of guideline for social security. Thirdly, if you want to enhance employment for women, you will need to undertake some action in the care sector and not simply in the new technologies, however important they may be. The care sector will be of key significance in years to come. Finally, I do not share the view of the British Conservatives and I would like to make this quite clear. It is important to point out that, within the Group of the European People’s Party and , there are also voices other than these.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, exactly this time last week I was in Basra, in the south of Iraq, with my fellow colleagues on the Parliamentary delegation. In Basra we were shown the most harrowing images of children who were born with the most terrible birth malformities as a result of the radiation from the last Gulf War, when allied forces used depleted uranium warheads. I wish Tony Blair and George Bush had been at that hospital. If they had, perhaps they would stop saying that this illegal and immoral war they are about to unleash on Iraq is somehow in the interests of the Iraqi people. The people of Iraq are still paying the price of the last war in cancers, leukaemias and deaths. I wish Commissioner Byrne had been at that hospital too. The facts are there. If the methodologies cited by him cannot explain them, then I would suggest that his methodologies are wrong. Indeed, increasing numbers of scientists are demonstrating that the impact of low-level radiation has been consistently underestimated. There are weaknesses in those methodologies. They are not right methodologies. By denying that, we do the people of Iraq a double disservice and the deaths go on.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Yesterday evening, I gave Mr Caudron the opportunity to make his final speech after 15 years as a Member of the European Parliament as he is due to retire shortly. He presented our group's final position on the railway package, making it clear that this liberalisation proposal is suitable for a Europe quite different from the one the Confederal Group of the would like to see. In 2000, the European Commission tried to force the Member States to privatise the whole of public transport. Since this Parliament excluded significant portions of urban and regional transport from this attempt on 14 November 2001, the Commission has turned its attention to the railways. It wants to liberalise not only international freight services but also domestic passenger services. In the meantime, we have gained bad experiences of this in the Netherlands. The move to sell shares in the state-run rail company Nederlandse Spoorwegen on the stock market appeared to lead to neglect of rolling stock and rail infrastructure, delays and industrial unrest and so has been stopped. This was done not as a political choice but because staff, passengers and eventually politicians too learned the lessons. The provision of train services by a competing company, since bought up by the international transport giant Connex-Vivendi, has also been terminated. Similar plans for Europe are now being held up by the Council, but are still not off the agenda.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, when it adopted the Radwan report, the majority of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs missed a rare and valuable opportunity to draw attention to reasons for the weakness of the euro that cannot be laid at the door of the European Central Bank. The sheer nonsense that we have heard here demonstrates how important the ECB’s independence is. The argument that the euro’s weakness is also a consequence of Euroland’s enormous bureaucracy, which – in the words of acknowledged experts – has a Socialist tendency and limits individuals’ freedoms, was rejected by a majority of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for clearly ideological reasons. The same fate was suffered by other amendments to the effect that the euro area is totally overloaded with heavy taxes, thus penalising entrepreneurialism. Rigid structures, the slow pace of liberalisation in important sectors of the economy and differences between inflation rates in individual euro Member States, which are already a cause for concern, are the reason why the improvement in public finances in many Member States is not the result of a sustained reduction in public expenditure and structural reforms, but rather a consequence of low interest rates and a heavier tax burden, which represent a threat to the Stability Pact. I would like to have seen all these points included in the report. It would also have been a good thing for this Parliament if it had had the courage to recognise in this particular report that the present weakness in the single European currency is chiefly due to a lack of economic flexibility. Nevertheless, I am glad that at least some reservations have been voiced about certain decisions taken recently in the euro countries, for example on working hours, which instead of making the labour market flexible have made it rigid, and are also contributing to the euro’s weakness. I do not mind saying this, even if Mr Brie, the chief ideologist of Germany’s old communists, whose party wrecked a whole state and who would do better to keep quiet here, does not like it. This is an unequivocal signal to voters in the euro area to give the all too numerous Red-Green governments their marching orders, if they... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, a few weeks ago, people still joked that the United States planned to release American citizens or soldiers – by force, if necessary – from the cells of the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Meanwhile, this controversy has developed into an extremely serious conflict between Europe and the United States. I would immediately like to make it clear what irritates and vexes me the most, and I think I speak for many other Europeans. As an American professor expressed it in this morning's Herald Tribune, a newspaper which is also read by Mr Oostlander, the United States behaves like a big gorilla that does not tolerate any restrictions imposed on its behaviour. In fact, what it comes down to is that the United States thinks it is above comparison with other nations. Strict agreements? Discipline? This is all well and good for other countries, but the United States does not feel like adhering to these. It is the double standards that go against the grain with Europe. If the Americans can do as they please, how can we in heaven’s name prevent the Russians and the Chinese, that do not happen to support the International Criminal Court either, from doing as they please and riding roughshod over agreements reached at international level? Meanwhile, the questions are mounting. Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr Haarder, allow me to submit to you the most pressing questions. It looks as if the future of SFOR is not at risk because a new UN mandate is not required for this. Is this also how the German Government views this? Is there therefore no risk of German troops withdrawing from Bosnia? And what is this saying about the legal position of the SFOR military? Are they immune from prosecution by the International Criminal Court? Does this immunity apply in Bosnia, or does it apply elsewhere in the world too? If the mandate of the UN police force in Bosnia is not extended, which is not likely, how will the non-European countries, which account for approximately 900 agents, or 60% of the total, react? If these leave soon, does this mean that the European soldiers and European police officers who stay behind will be tested to the limit? Is the European Union – and I sincerely hope so – as Mr Xavier Solana stated yesterday, willing and able to provide additional police troops promptly for this police force, and is Mr Haarder, is the Council, prepared to pay extra for this? Finally, I should like to ask the Council one last specific question about the position of Great Britain and France in the Security Council. Is this now truly being coordinated with the European Union across the board? In other words, am I to conclude, if the answer is positive, that the Council too endorses the compromise proposals which are now, for example, being tabled by Britain and which, in my view, undermine the position of the Criminal Court? Finally, allow me to finish on a positive note. It could be a step in the right direction if the European Union turned this into a policy of defending people, in the knowledge that accountability is required, for one King Kong is more than enough.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the new world order both requires a stronger United Nations and, at the same time, hinders its coming into being. More than ever, major world problems require a global approach, which entails effective decision-making and implementation. The UN should undergo a thorough overhaul in order to reflect the new relationships and to carry out the many tasks in an adequate manner. Everyone here is agreed on this, yet nothing is being done because everyone has a different opinion on how it should be. It is hypocritical to embrace the UN millennium declaration if we are subsequently not prepared to act on it and stick our necks out for it. UN reforms are not only technical, but often involve a redistribution of power, and that is where things are going continually wrong. For example, the reform of the Security Council has been the subject of squabbles for more than ten years, with no results so far. The United States is by far the most powerful player on the world stage and has little need of multilateralism, which it regards as a restriction of its power. Other countries, including France and the United Kingdom, refuse to relinquish the privileges they have inherited from the old world order. Potential permanent members do not grant each other favoured positions. Permanent seats for continents only work if the regional powers can agree on a rotation mechanism. The proposed double veto system is better than what we have at the moment, but offers no real solution, especially not if the number of permanent seats is being increased still further. Instead of this, it would be preferable to use a European model of differential vote weighting, and hence to abolish the veto system. I do not believe that the European Union's political coordination in the UN is as bad as Mr Laschet suggests in his excellent report. Generally, there is most definitely EU consensus in the General Assembly. Despite this, Europe appears hopelessly divided in major crises, such as over Iraq. In my opinion, this is mainly attributable to the increased rivalry between France, the United Kingdom and Germany. A legal entity, or even an EU minister, will be unable to create common foreign policy as long as the big European states continue to fight for EU leadership. The Laschet report contains many interesting recommendations for building up relations between the European Union and the UN. Some are very valuable, but there are perhaps too many for the short term. We have to be careful not to create another UN-EU bureaucracy. In my opinion, the main role of our Parliament is in the area of monitoring and not so much in the diplomatic arena. The enlarged European Union can, and must, make a substantial contribution to the desperately needed reforms of the United Nations. Political necessity is beyond dispute; what is still lacking is the political courage to give shape to the new world order within the UN in a decisive manner.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, at this time it is certainly nothing new to state that there is a great divide between the citizens and the European Union. Lack of confidence in the possibility of ensuring food safety, for example, is spreading like wildfire and, when all is said and done, obscures the Union's positive work in this sector. But we are going to discuss this today. In this context, it is therefore important to emphasise the political value of the directive upon which we are about to vote. Thanks to the Commission's sound proposal, further improved by Mrs González Álvarez's work, the text that we are examining today at last brings good news for consumers, to which, moreover, the non-governmental organisations which represent them bear witness. The laws on product safety, in particular the safety of those products which have hitherto escaped regulation by the vertical legislation already governing the matter, is being improved, consolidated and made more transparent. A great deal of effort has been made to better define the interaction between vertical laws on certain categories of products and this new horizontal directive, so as to definitely achieve a satisfactory result. Then I would like to stress the importance of the amendments adopted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, which increase transparency towards the end consumer and apportion responsibility to distributors as well as producers in the event of products deemed dangerous being withdrawn from the market. In the hope of seeing the final line taken by the rapporteur endorsed and declaring my support for her regarding the amendments which are to be put to the vote in plenary, I trust that this directive will rapidly continue through the procedures so that the European citizens can be provided with confirmation of the Union's undertaking to preserve their safety as soon as possible.

Political group: PSE