GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, travelling across the Union can sometimes seem like travelling in a time machine. Starting off in Britain, which still has a poor recycling record, the WEEE Directive looks like the future. But when you visit Denmark or the Netherlands where electrical and electronic waste is routinely collected, you see that the Commission directive is really only an attempt to harmonise and build on the best practice of the present. It is only those of us who still live in the past, Mr Bowe, who find it challenging and ambitious. It certainly will play a major part in waste-management policy and that is for the good. The Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party wants to encourage recycling, good product design, best-use resources and reduce pollution. We strongly support the principle of producer responsibility. There is a lot still to be agreed between Parliament and the Council through the conciliation process and the fact that we are going to be engaged in lengthy discussion is a tribute to the rapporteur, who has done so much to bring all the political parties in this House together so that we are united and will almost certainly secure qualified majority voting on many amendments tomorrow. In particular I welcome his latest compromise proposal on paying for the costs of dealing with orphan waste. I do not believe that large legitimate manufacturers should have to pay the costs created by other companies, whether they be free-riders or small organisations. I am pleased that encouragement is now being given to re-use materials where environmentally appropriate, and I thank my colleagues across the House for the support they have given me in opposing the development of these so-called clever chips. My words may fall on some deaf ears here but I would ask Members to consider giving their support to a couple of amendments I have tabled. Amendment No 82 attempts to address the concern of cable manufacturers by making clear that financial responsibility for WEEE rests with the producer of the finished equipment and not with individual component manufacturers. I thought we were all agreed on that point. Amendment No 71 represents a plea for help for plastic recyclers. I conclude by saying with a certain mischievous glee, as someone who has campaigned for better recycling in my own country for 30 years, that I rather hope that this directive puts a bomb under my own local authorities and recalcitrant government.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, although I imagine that you were about to suggest the same thing, I, on behalf of everyone here, ask you to call for a minute’s silence for this latest victim of democracy, this time in Catalonia. (The House observed a minute’s silence) President. – Ladies and gentlemen, it is hard to return to the agenda, but we will have to do so. It is important for a Parliament to speak out in public on this kind of matter. ***

Political group: GUE-NGL
We do not want the Commission to table a proposal aimed at changing the national share systems. We have chosen to vote against the wording that calls upon the Commission to implement the one share/one vote principle, because this is not in line with the principle of subsidiarity. Such a proposal would have far-reaching consequences for patterns of ownership in quite a few Member States. Different national company law systems must be respected. Nor can we support the wording designed to facilitate the movement of workers, because it takes no account of trade union aspects and is not accompanied by demands that companies accept social responsibility. Increased movement in the European labour market is good, but we cannot accept flexibility at workers’ expense.

Political group: PSE
I should like to support the request because in my view, it is indeed inappropriate to be voting on a report in the framework of the codecision procedure in a very small gathering of this Parliament. Furthermore, it will probably give us some more time to consider other compromises for issues which are currently controversial, because it is also a complex report which contains a number of ambiguities about the different amendments. I would therefore like to support the request.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, all honour to you for your stamina. In the short time that has been allocated to me and at this late hour, I can only formulate a few guiding principles that will determine my commitment to reach compromises and my voting behaviour on Thursday. I should like to outline two objectives. First of all, promoting private investment in the European Union. We must make every effort to increase liquid assets for the benefit of economic activity and to recover from the economic decline once again. Secondly, protecting small private investors. On the one hand, by laying down unambiguous rules that are closely monitored and, on the other hand, by optimising these small investors’ choices in terms of investment products, institutions and methods. It is the latter point that formed the subject of the debates concerning the directive. In my view, the small investor should be able to have access to stock exchanges as well as his own home bank. In-house matching is a fully-fledged alternative to the monopoly of stock exchanges, something which causes me increasing anxiety, certainly if it transcends national borders and stands in the way of national supervision. This requires transparency, but must not adversely affect price forming and liquidity on the financial markets. As far as the last point – the method of legislation – is concerned, I agree with the approach, based on the Lamfalussy method, of delegating a number of things to supervisors and regulators. I concur with everyone who has stated that it is important to reach compromises and to encourage the Council to do the same.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this is my maiden speech and I am delivering it with a great deal of pleasure and conviction as the topic is human rights. In terms of human rights, Europe has a very eventful past and this is why we have become to some extent the cradle of these human rights. We need to continue to stand up for these rights, especially in our own Member States and societies, but also elsewhere. As Mr Sterckx said, we certainly need to do this vis-à-vis the United States which, after all, is close to us in terms of democratic values. The treatment of the Native Americans in many respects flies in the face of the most fundamental human rights. The account of the Dineh Indians is telling. With the discovery and, certainly, the exploitation of black gold – and, later on, uranium and oil – all possible means were used to remove these people from their land and to send them to regions with few prospects other than poverty, hardship and contamination. The area in Arizona which is to be the New Land for the Dineh Indians was hit in 1979 by the worst nuclear disaster in US history. It is now the intention to send the last 4 000 Dineh Indians to this land. The fight of these Indians is being backed by more than 250 NGOs and, thanks to the efforts of the Belgian ‘Mother Earth’ organisation, we are being kept informed of this situation. This too is characteristic of American society, which hears little about it. They get het up about wars and genocide on other continents, but wrongly keep quiet about the genocide taking place in their own country. Today, the Dineh Indians are facing their final fight for their right to land, for their right to dignity and, above all, for their right to their way of life. There are few of them left and they are up against a very powerful, economic adversary.

Political group: PSE
In yesterday’s questions to Council, the President—in-Office of the Council did not answer my question on the number of victims of the war in Iraq. He said that he could not reply because he did not have the necessary information. My supplementary question also met with a contemptuous and deafening silence. I tabled this question on 14 May and we are now in July; if the Council had wanted to answer, it would have provided some information yesterday on the number of human lives lost. I consequently deduce that the Council, rather than being unable to give information, does not wish to answer. This could be interpreted as demonstrating scorn for the fact that the European Parliament represents the people. The victims of an unjust war must not be consigned to oblivion or to disdain by an institution such as the European Parliament. I therefore ask you, Mr President, to support my request to defend the dignity of our Parliament and to support my request to find out how soon we will be able to get this information from the Council.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I should like to start by thanking and warmly congratulating Mrs Fraisse on her initiative to mobilise and increase the awareness of the European Parliament and all the competent agencies on the very serious issue of the relationship between sport and women. This report is particularly important and valuable in the run up to the 2004 Olympic Games and we hope that the proposals which it contains will be taken into serious account by the Athens 2004 organising committee. However, I should also like to warmly congratulate the Commissioner, who has responded directly and positively to the report's proposals. Indeed, Commissioner, sport can be a very pro-active way of combating discrimination against women and, more importantly, of combating the under-representation of women, and I think that measures should be taken in this direction in order to increase the number of women in leading positions at all levels of sports activities, to support the personal and professional development of women in the field of sport, the organisation and administration of sport and training and the organisation of sporting events at all levels. Mechanisms need to be created which ensure that young women will have a say in the development of policies and programmes which concern them. The media need to be encouraged to positively reflect and adequately cover the breadth, depth, quality and benefits of women and girls working in sport; and, finally, support is needed to achieve the standards of equality between the sexes laid down by the International Olympic Committee in 1998 and the practical application of everything included in the Thessaloniki declaration, which closed the work of a large international conference held within the framework of the Greek Presidency. As we approach the 2004 Olympic Games, let us make the idea of women's participation an important message from these games. Let the Olympic Games become a real celebration of humanity which will promote the values to which women attach particular importance, the values of peace, democracy, equality, respect for differences, dialogue between cultures, the creative coexistence of people and the resolution of differences by peaceful means.

Political group: PSE
We Swedish Social Democrats have today voted against the amendments aimed at increasing the subsidies for agriculture. We believe that the agricultural subsidies must be reduced. A first step in the task of reforming agriculture would be to transfer resources to rural development. On a slightly longer term view, it is not however enough merely to redistribute resources within the agricultural sector. Instead, the agricultural subsidies must also be considerably reduced. That applies in particular to the tobacco subsidies. The EU must not provide subsidies for the production of crops that endanger our lives as human beings.

Political group: PSE
The process of agreeing these common standards may have started as long ago as 1978 but clearly the fact that the British Government appears to be going ahead with a massively environmentally damaging project suggests that it has not been very successful so far. I wonder if you would answer a question concerning investment by EU companies in the EU applicant countries. I ask this because of the issue of coherence, the subject of this morning’s discussion. On the one hand we ask applicant countries to take on board the environmental acquis and yet, at the very same time, the EU Member States are supporting and encouraging investment in those countries which is itself hugely environmentally damaging. Can you say whether or not the specific issue of investment in applicant countries has featured in any of the discussions to date to which you have been referring?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, people are getting somewhat tired of summits, because their practical results are so poor. However, each summit on development and the environment has marked a turning point in the relationship between man and his environment. The Stockholm Summit led to a general increase in awareness about the major threats to our environment. The Rio Summit defined a new arena, that of sustainable development. However, the concept of shared but differentiated responsibility has not gained the necessary support from the wealthiest countries. World leaders cannot, of course, be satisfied when they are reminded that the Rio commitments have not been fulfilled. In the ten years between Rio and Johannesburg there has been a significant change of scenery to a globalised society in which social and economic inequalities seem to be closely linked to environmental problems and to the governability of all countries. Eradicating poverty is a world priority, because it is the only way that we can manage the processes of globalisation in positive and fair manner. However, trends show that those living in the wealthiest countries wish to maintain their standard of living, while the other 80% of the world population needs to attain a dignified standard of living. As a result, the only hope for global sustainability is to change methods of production and consumption. We are aware of the key elements required to achieve fair growth in this globalised world, but we are not being determined enough in applying them. Transparency and openness in the markets, knowledge management, innovation management and the transfer of technology, efficiency in our processes and products and accepting and practising social and environmental responsibility in all sectors are some of the most important elements. The European Union has given clear signals that it is capable of leading that process. I hope that in Johannesburg we will be capable of defending our courageous, generous and worthy positions, which confirm us as leaders of a new world order.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is important, in the light of Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf's question, to remember that we are discussing the adventitious presence of GMOs which are licensed in the European Union. We are not discussing the release of GMOs, but the definition of a further quality standard in the marketing of conventional seed. Parliament adopted the proposal for a regulation on the traceability and labelling of GMOs or genetically modified food and feedingstuffs at first reading in June, calling for a threshold value of 0.5%. I agree with the Commission here that this value is pitched too low and is impracticable. A tolerance threshold of 1% for the adventitious presence of GMOs in non-GM products is realistic. In setting threshold values for seed, which is what we are discussing here, the Commission has to take due account of Parliament's and the Council's suggested thresholds in the procedure mentioned. The threshold values for the adventitious presence of GMOs need to be coordinated in the two texts. I should also like to stress that uncontrolled reproduction represents another particular and potential source of GMOs in food and feed. Reproduction seed is not subject to any mandatory quality testing and is not therefore tested for the presence of GMOs. That needs to be made perfectly clear here. The Commission's biotechnology strategy sets the coexistence of various types of cultivation as an important priority. Coexistence is only possible if we have reasonable threshold values as, technically, wind-borne pollen can never be discounted in nature. One hundred percent purity was never possible for biological reasons and never will be in the future. Threshold values for product purity are standard and necessary in numerous industries. In the organic farming sector, for example, there is a threshold value of 5%. That means that products labelled as organic products may contain up to 5% of certain non-organic ingredients. I say that for the benefit of the . The important criterion must be that the statutory framework is practicable. More importantly, it must be in keeping with WTO rules and must not hamper the development of biotechnology in Europe by tying it up in unnecessary red tape.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, referral to the Court is not something that we would have chosen. The Commission promised to consult us under Article 300 with the power of assent. The Commission has not fulfilled that promise and, therefore, we have had to use a very blunt instrument to try to maintain democracy within this Union. ***

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, thank you, Commissioner Wallström, for your intervention. I think the EU successfully kept its act together, apart perhaps from in the last critical hours. Clearly, however, there are many losers following a conference of this kind. I think that we, as politicians, have lost out because we have sent a very bad signal to a great many committed people by failing to reach an agreement. Secondly, I think that the section of commerce and industry which looks seriously at this problem and which would like to have some ground rules has also lost out. Therefore, it is, of course, incredibly important for there to be another conference soon. I think the EU was right not to give way on carbon sinks. This is not just because of the difficulties of verification and measurement but also because more and more researchers maintain – whether rightly or wrongly, I do not know – that today’s carbon sinks may well be tomorrow’s carbon sources. Or, to put it another way: forests stop being carbon sinks and become carbon sources. If that is the case, then it would obviously be extremely risky to add this to the equation at the present stage, when it is still so difficult to come up with definitions. I should prefer to say, Commissioner, that, in the ongoing dialogue with the Americans, it would be better to be more generous when it comes to emissions trading in general than to introduce something which is extremely difficult to substantiate on the basis purely of research. I was a part of the parliamentary delegation. We had a meeting with a number of American Members of Congress. I was quite alarmed at the arrogance and ignorance shown by the Americans. I got the feeling that they do not want to ratify the Kyoto protocol under any circumstances. One conclusion I came to is that we need more in the way of transatlantic dialogue on these issues – not only dialogue between governments and the Commission but also, and especially, between Members of Congress. That is perhaps something which we in the European Parliament can help bring about. Finally, a question: even if a conference in May were not to succeed, is the Commissioner prepared to go further, to be in the vanguard, take the lead and recommend ratification by the EU?

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I should like to start by saying that I am most dissatisfied with the Commission for its unwarranted delay in submitting the proposal to extend the six public health action plans to Parliament. They include the action plan to combat cancer, the programme of action for the prevention of AIDS, the programme of action for the prevention of drug dependence and the action plan to promote health and, if they are suspended, it will mean an end to the projects and the work being carried out by the networks which have been set up. The codecision procedure to implement the new public health action plans for 2001-2006 cannot be completed by 12 December 2000, when 4 out of the 6 programmes expire, which is why we urgently need to agree to their being extended, initially by one year and then by a second year if the new action programme has not yet entered into force. This being the case, I agree with the rapporteur's proposal to speed up the procedures and avoid two readings by reaching an agreement with the Council and the Commission on the budget lines in question. I trust that we shall not have to deal again with this sort of delay in such vital areas as public health in the future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner Patten, the recent peace talks begun in the USA between Israel and Syria mark a turning point in the history of the Middle East. It has taken fifty years to reach this point, which will involve some particularly difficult negotiations. There will be no meeting today in Shepherdstown but we must hope, as Mr Patten said just now, that this postponement of the negotiations due to Syrian requirements will only represent one more step on the road to a peace agreement which will change the face of the Middle East. This hope is contained in our motion for a resolution. We hope for a fair and balanced agreement based on respect for sovereignties and the right to live securely within safe and recognised borders. All the foreign troops, including therefore the Syrian forces, must withdraw from Lebanon in accordance with Resolution 520 of the United Nations Security Council. Dare we hope for an Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon by July 2000, the date promised by Ehud Barak? Dare we hope for a dual peace agreement between Israel and its neighbours to the north? We really hope and believe so. Never have the parties been so determined. One fundamental point to be stressed is the balance which must be expressed in the message from Europe and which must exist between the people. There must also be a political balance between the participants in the negotiations. Following the attack in Hadera on Monday, we must repeat our condemnation of any form of terrorism. In terms of balance, or should I say imbalance, I must add that it is to be regretted that Europe is still playing a minor political role in resolving this conflict. At midday, Mr Gama referred to the financial and commercial support provided by Europe to the region. Despite everything, we are being forced to recognise that the resumption of the peace process is largely due to the work of Washington. Like other Arab countries before them, the Syrians chose the Americans to sponsor the negotiations. This was the choice also made by Israel where Europe suffers from a partisan public image, and this is a fact, not a judgement. This is now the opportunity to reiterate to Mr Patten, Mr Solana and Mr Moratinos how much we are relying on their efforts to include Europe in the search for a peaceful solution to the conflict. Although it is difficult for Europe to speak with one voice about the peace process, it can and must speak in the same spirit of confidence and solidarity.

Political group: ELDR