GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I would like to inform you that the Committee on Fisheries has decided not to accept this request for urgent procedure, as we were not aware of the Commission proposal until 20 November, when we no longer had time to include it on our agenda. It was therefore not possible for us to deal with it with the urgency that was asked of us. However, we will do everything we can to ensure that we will be able to debate it here in the next part-session of the new year.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, President Prodi, Commissioner Byrne, ladies and gentlemen, I too would like to return, as Mrs Roth-Behrendt did just now, to the dioxin crisis and Belgium, of course, without necessarily discussing it as a purely Belgian problem. The recent Standing Veterinary Committee of the Union took the decision, a fortnight ago, to lift the embargo on Belgian beef exports, thus recognising the serious nature of the tests and the strictness of the standards which are now imposed by the new Belgian Government. The meat produced today in Belgium is henceforth certified as being of excellent quality, and may now return to its former position on the market. In fact, it seems to me that the European Union would be well advised to follow this example in promoting systematic testing for PCB and dioxin in all States, as this is not the case at the moment. It would be remiss of me not to mention the creation in Belgium of an agency for food safety, responsible for monitoring the entire food chain from beginning to end. Victims of a crisis which they did not cause and whose consequences they have no control of, Belgian farmers, moreover, are waiting for concrete evidence of European solidarity, so that this dioxin crisis may be recognised as epizootic, in the same way as the mad cow crisis in Great Britain. This, in my opinion, is the price of Community solidarity. We must now, four months after the start of the crisis, rise above the emotional atmosphere – you mentioned it too, Mr Prodi – which has often dominated the debate until now. It is not, as I said, an acute problem limited to Belgium, but is, indeed, a case with a European dimension. What do we want to eat? What level of quality do we want for our consumers? How can we guarantee this quality? It is our way of life, as you said, Mr President. To do this, then, the Union must invest more in the safety of the food chain, at every stage of the process, and decide, for example – as we have discussed – whether or not it is useful to create this agency, this notorious independent food agency, supposedly inspired by an American model or some other such thing. I note your various proposals, Mr Prodi, particularly citizens’ access to the early warning system; and Commissioner Byrne’s proposal on the White Paper. Having said that, the questions remain: when will this actually happen? What is the timetable for these proposals? I would also like to ask you a question too: to what extent does the Union, in fact, use, if at all, its own resources, such as, for example, the research centre into health and food safety located at Ispra? As the elected representatives of the citizens primarily affected by all these stakes, which are crucial, this Parliament must play an essential role in this area. The vote on the next budget, including a series of amendments designed to draw the initial lessons from this dioxin crisis, will indicate whether we have decided to lead the way or not. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, if it were up to the EVP (Evangelical People’s party), there would be no software patents at all, and if it were up to you, Commissioner, there would not be any either. This is how I understood it, after I received the proposal and after I read the existing legislation – and the innumerable letters we have all been receiving – more than once. Many people in our group support the starting points and the objectives in the Commission’s proposal. Commissioner, I hope that you will be able to support a number of amendments which have been submitted on behalf of our group and which – building on Mrs McCarthy’s report and the report by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market – define matters more clearly and put more flesh on the bones of the monitoring task. I do not believe the assertions that are persistently doing the rounds that this proposal would be a bad thing for small- and medium-sized enterprises. More legal certainty and uniform application of the legal rules in the internal market are things small- and medium-sized enterprises have a particular need of. In my view, small- and medium-sized enterprises do not have a specific problem with this directive, but they do have a general problem with the patent system as such. Much of the criticism in the letters boils down to that. This is true both when they enjoy the protection of a patent themselves and when they have to deal with the patent rights of others. Hence my question, Commissioner, as to whether you and your administration could not think creatively about how we can achieve a European approach that will enable small- and medium-sized enterprises to improve their position in patent land. I have not submitted an amendment on this as I think that this text is not an appropriate place for this from a legal point of view. I do, however, think that it is important enough to make this suggestion now from a political point of view, and I would therefore appreciate it very much if you could give me an answer.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President-in-Office, the Spanish Presidency made the fight against terrorism its top priority. You, for your part, have chosen to prioritise enlargement. A good political decision – well done! We must beware, however, of thinking that, in this half-yearly game of musical chairs, our citizens will allow themselves to be duped. We must not ride roughshod over what most of them regard as a fundamental achievement of the European Union, by which I mean, of course, the transition to the euro. In this respect we still have a great deal to do. First and foremost, we need genuine coordination of economic policies so that the euro can foster growth and create jobs. Your country, Mr President-in-Office, has opted out. Our clear wish for the Danish people is that this situation will change. But tell us how it is possible, in these conditions, to provide leadership on a matter in which progress depends on political will and determination. What conclusions do you draw from this for the functioning of our institutions, and how do you intend to organise your presidency in this domain?

Political group: PSE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the report by Mr Pérez Royo is to be welcomed for the balanced approach and technical competence employed in its preparation. A subject like the taxation of savings certainly ought to be dealt with in such a manner because the field is so sensitive. The Commission and the Council have considered at least three hypothetical paths to take in their time, often changing their minds and their strategies. They are: a withholding tax, the exchange of information, and both possibilities together. In the end, they opted for the exchange of information and, after a heated debate in the Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs, this was limited to natural persons. As shadow rapporteur I fought for the exclusion of legal persons from the directive, because a business, whatever form of company status it may have, is obliged to draw up a balance sheet and have it approved. As soon as investments in savings products appear on it, the income they generate must consequently be indicated in the accounts. Therefore, extending the communication requirement to legal persons would be not only superfluous but certainly counterproductive, since it would overburden the communication in a manner that is surely avoidable. The problem of third countries also needs to be addressed. Should any of them fail to accept the mechanism, it would undermine the whole directive because, if at the time of implementation the conditions in the Member States and third countries were not uniform, it would be highly feasible for substantial amounts of savings to be transferred in real time. The conclusions of the Feira European Council unequivocally state that sufficient reassurances must be obtained from third countries regarding these or equivalent measures so that the adoption and implementation of the directive may be decided upon no later than 31 December 2002, by unanimity. Another important aspect concerns the Member States that are not subject to the communication requirement for a period of seven years: Belgium, Austria and Luxembourg. These States, however, as laid down in Amendment No 14 to Article 10 paragraph 1, will be required at the end of the transitional period to fully participate in the automatic exchange of information. In the way the directive has been drawn up, all attempts to maintain anonymity have been blocked. It will also be necessary to make it work smoothly and fluently, keeping a watchful eye open for any laundering of dirty money. Without this opportunity to launder money, national and international terrorism will find it hard to survive. From this perspective, my Amendment No 6 to Article 3 paragraph 2 (b) also seeks to establish the full personal identity of all contractual relations made prior to the directive as soon as they show any kind of activity. In this regard, it would be desirable to have a European personal data centre to check all major movements of money that may have – or are just suspected of having – connections with international terrorism.

Political group: PPE-DE
The President has not responded to the request of the chairman of my group to have the verbatim Minutes of yesterday's sitting revised. As he himself has just admitted, Mr Barón Crespo spoke to a fellow Member yesterday, saying, 'calla, desgraciado [be quiet, wretch]'. Mr President, this is not only an arrogant expression, it also shows contempt for an opponent which is incompatible with the democratic spirit. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I should like first of all to congratulate Mrs Cederschiöld on becoming the first Swedish Vice-President of the European Parliament. I want to say how delighted I am at her election. What happened on 13 December of last year in the Indian Parliament was unprecedented. The Parliament of a democratic, pluralistic country was attacked by militant Islamicist groups. Parliament – the very heart of democracy – was exposed to a brutal assault. People were murdered. Democracy as a whole was called into question by these militant Islamicists. It is important that we ourselves should try to understand emotionally what happened in New Delhi on that day. Imagine if our own Parliament here in Strasbourg or our national parliaments – in my case, the riksdag in Stockholm – were to be exposed to a terrorist attack. We should react in the most vigorous way. It is perhaps difficult for us, as Europeans, properly to understand the real seriousness of what happened. I want to address Commissioner Diamantopoulou and mention something about the Islamic religious schools, or madrassas as they are called, in Pakistan. I believe that the Commissioner and the European Union have an incredibly important task when it comes to promoting a form of education in these schools that is based upon the ideas of love and of love of one’s neighbour and does not see other religions or other political outlooks with the eyes of hatred, for it is in these madrassas and other Islamicist contexts that hatred is disseminated. Dear friends, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan has fallen, but the Taliban regime’s mentality of hatred and violence, of calling other people ‘infidels’ and seeing them as inferiors, is a frame of mind that still exists. I would call upon Mrs Diamantopoulou to do everything she can to ensure that it is tolerance and the ideas of love and love of one’s neighbour that come to characterise education in Pakistan and, of course, in schools in the Middle East too. Religion should be all about ennobling the soul, promoting lofty ethics and morality and giving people spiritual values – not about serving the causes of violence and hatred. Pakistan operated as a training ground for the Al-Qa’ida terrorists. It was one of three countries in the world that recognised the Taliban regime. Afghanistan’s Taliban ambassador to Pakistan was allowed to remain there following the attack on the United States on 11 September. Pakistan has a very great deal to put in order. What President Musharraf has said is important. We are now waiting for him to take vigorous action. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on 26 March 1991 through the Treaty of Asunción, Mercosur was founded, a common market of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The European Union served as an example and I am delighted at that, as I am sure we all are. I have therefore voted for the motion, in the hope, however, that, in this cooperation agreement, some attention may be given to trade in the merchandise known as “pensions”. So I hope that, in these agreements and in their practical implementation, the pensioners of Mercosur will see their pension payments controlled, supervised, prompted, and speeded up and that we will get from them whatever might be useful to European pensioners.

Political group: PPE-DE
The Members of the PvdA (labour party) Euro-delegation have voted for an amendment that procedurally establishes the resolutions of the European Parliament of 3 December 1998 and 5 May 1999, the subject of which is the statute for the Members of Parliament. The PvdA delegation does not consider this vote to be a reflection of how it views the content of the resolutions of 3 December 1998 and 5 May 1999. It regards the vote as no more than a procedural affair that is a necessary to allow the negotiations with the Council to proceed on the statute for the Members of Parliament that has yet to come into force. It is important for the amendment to convey explicitly Parliament’s willingness to negotiate with the Council in order to obtain its approval for a statute for the Members of Parliament. This will entail a willingness on the part of the European Parliament to reach compromises with the Council. The PvdA delegation and others in the European Parliament have worked hard in the past to cultivate this willingness to compromise on the part of the European Parliament and will continue to do so. Finally, the PvdA delegation remains committed to the idea of a new statute for the Members of the European Parliament coming into force around the turn of the year.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I feel that it is my duty to speak about an issue that regards the dramatic legal event in Italy affecting the current life senator, Giulio Andreotti. He is a public figure who is well known at European level, a figure who is at the forefront of Community affairs. I waited for the Court of Cassation’s verdict before speaking on this issue. Even more urgently, I waited for the reasons given a few days ago by the Court of Cassation, in which it not only acquitted senator Andreotti of a torment which had lasted years and of preposterous accusations of no less than murder, but, in the reasons that I have just mentioned, it criticised the absurd action taken by the Court of Appeal in condemning him: personal theories which could not be backed by any evidence. I therefore believe that the ordeal of this man, a life senator, one of the public figures to have made a significant contribution to the development of democracy in the country and one of the fathers of Europe, should be firmly highlighted, and that it must be made clear that a part of the Italian justice system, which is clearly ineffectual if not subversive, enforced this situation which has disturbed both Italy and Europe for 10 years. I therefore urge you, Madam President, and I am sure that I am not just interpreting the will of the Group of the European People’s Party , but also the opinion of the European Parliament as a whole, to give Senator Andreotti formal recognition for the clarity, the far-sightedness and the great democratic uprightness that distinguishes this valuable and useful European figure.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this report was postponed by this Parliament because human rights are being violated in Chechnya and international standards are not being adhered to, and in the knowledge – related to this – that a war is being waged against this people. Now this report has appeared on the agenda without there being a discussion on the human rights situation in Chechnya. This is astonishing because in September in the UN the subject of Chechnya was on the agenda and was not satisfactorily concluded. Last week in the Council of Europe there was a big discussion with the Russian delegation, the vote on the basis of a report by Lord Hewitt was not able to go ahead and the matter was postponed. Why is the European Parliament suddenly putting this subject on the agenda and acting as though nothing were amiss in Chechnya? I move that this report be postponed.

Political group: Verts-ALE
The report by Mrs Figueiredo could make a very valuable contribution to the fight against social exclusion by developing cooperation between Member States along these lines. The Council should therefore ensure that: - funding for the programme is substantially increased, - a chart of specific targets is incorporated into national programmes, - all related policies are adjusted in a bid to integrate social groups with special needs, - new forms of exclusion are included, such as exclusion from the information society, - social agencies, especially representatives of the vulnerable groups targeted by the programme, are involved in the procedures, - the programme is spearheaded by measures to help child poverty, women and the elderly, - a network is established at European level to record, develop, promote and adjust the programme to combat social exclusion.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, the first thing I wish to say is that I think it would be unworthy of the European Parliament to be at loggerheads over this issue. We should not be presenting the public with a spectacle of that kind. (Applause) My second point is that you decided, on the basis of Rule 7(4), to consult the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market. That is your right. However, if I have understood correctly, we do not have a proposal from the Legal Affairs Committee as a basis for a vote, but you did ask the Committee on Legal Affairs for its opinion. There is a legal problem here that only you can clear up. I have in mind the difference between Article 12 of the Act on the election of Members by direct universal suffrage and Rule 7(4) of our Rules of Procedure. There is a discrepancy here. My advice is that we need to clear up this discrepancy. That is your task, Madam President. There is nothing we can vote on until you have cleared this up with the Committee on Legal Affairs. (Applause) My advice is therefore that we should not hold a vote today, but that we should await your decision, Madam President. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, rarely has the European Parliament devoted its attention to a natural disaster in circumstances so dramatic and so deserving of our support. It is not just the extent of this disaster, and its expression in terms of the number of dead, communities stranded, children with nothing to eat, the destruction of homes and property, or the belated aid many have spoken of today, that arouse our sympathy. It is the irony of a people who, after securing their independence and surviving a war, had the ability and intelligence to choose peace and democracy, and began to rebuild their infrastructure and pursue development, only to be met with a natural tragedy of these proportions, forcing it to start all over again in many areas. The strengthening of humanitarian aid, debt forgiveness for one of the poorest peoples in the world and the holding of the international conference provided for in the resolution, which I hope we will approve, is the least we can do for these people who will never give up their African journey towards peace, democracy and development. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as others have said, many promises have been made on debt relief but in fact very few have been delivered. After all the headlines that we heard at Cologne last year, less than $13 billion of the $100 billion promised has actually been cancelled and as the Commission and the Council have told us, contributions to the HIPC Trust Fund are still way below target. As the Commissioner rightly says, the burden deserves to be shared. The fact is that despite a $1 trillion budget surplus over 10 years, President Clinton is not able to squeeze $210 million for HIPC out of Congress. That is an appalling fact for us to take on board. It is also the case that we are still waiting for the World Bank and the IMF to come up with something similar to the European Union. All G7 countries have promised some form of 100% debt cancellation, but many of them are very slow and disinclined to do it in the way that we would like. Also, to qualify for debt relief, each country has to complete a long and often contradictory ‘HIPC’ process, and only 5 countries have so far managed to go through the hoops that they are being asked to go through. So far, the United Kingdom is the only country that has offered 100% debt cancellation. France, Germany and Japan only include pre-cut-off debts and so ignore a significant portion of debt. Japan, incidentally, ties its debt relief to responsibility to buy Japanese exports. On Mozambique, for instance, it is very significant that the IMF, the World Bank and the Paris Club only postponed payments from Mozambique and then actually lent more money. So, what I would say, finally, is that we in this Parliament urge all the creditors to stop delaying and to start working really hard towards fulfilling full debt cancellation for the poorest countries. Of course, I agree with all my colleagues, the poorest countries who fulfil the criteria of delivering debt relief to those countries that show a commitment to social sector and human development support.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I have listened carefully to the President-in-Office's reply. Certainly the Commission has a responsibility for the application of Community legislation but the Council cannot also be without responsibility for the fact that a Member State is not applying an important directive. And of course, in relation to the original question, today there is a presidential decree – a month ago – it has of course changed – but the presidential decree died in its infancy because the Civil Court of Appeal of Crete found in judgment 466 in 2002 that it contradicted the basic provisions of the Community directive. I can do no more than repeat my question to the President-in-Office with this new information.

Political group: GUE-NGL