GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the present draft directive concerning national emission ceilings tackles the main atmospheric pollutants. The salient points of this directive, therefore, concern the reduction of emission levels of the said substances to below the critical levels and loads. The directive’s key element, or rather the most talked-about part of this proposal is, of course, the table which lists per country the permitted annual emission for each substance. A key concern in the discussion on this subject matter was that when at UN level, the 36 countries, including the EU Member States, agreed upon other, and often less strict, standards for the same substances, this met with a storm of protest. Consequently, at first reading, many argued in favour of replacing the European Commission table, which may have been ambitious, by the UN’s so-called ‘Gothenburg table’, which allowed higher ceilings. During the discussions at first reading, I already indicated that the line of reasoning was rather weak. After all, UN agreements always have a lower level of ambition due to the fact that it is difficult to compare the situations in rich, prosperous, and thus often more polluting countries, with the situations in developing countries. Moreover, our continent suffers the direct environmental effects of the emission of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and volatile organic substances and, albeit to a lesser extent, ammonia. At first reading, the Group adopted the European Commission’s ceiling at first reading. However, we have improved the ammonia table, partly because the risk of spreading is less pronounced. My instinct tells me that the Council’s compromise proposal with regard to SO2, NOx and the VOC will lead to higher emission levels. Only with regard to ammonia can I identify with the Council’s compromise. The Commissioner is as aware as we are of the problems involved in implementing the nitrate directive: in actual fact, none of the Member States meet the standards specified therein. The Commission’s proposals to further reduce the ammonia ceiling are not feasible, in my opinion. I would add to this that the effects of ammonia emission are also partly a local phenomenon, and that a lower goal can therefore also be justified. That means that we largely go along with the rapporteur: we support the first eight amendments; we do not endorse Amendment No 9. In the table, we support the SO2, NOx and the VOC and, where ammonia is concerned, we would refer to the Council’s proposal. We are also struggling with the rapporteur’s notion that what we want to reach in 2010 should, in actual fact, be reached in 2004. That seems highly ambitious to us. Finally, I must also say that the working relationship with this rapporteur was highly successful, and that the work on the large combustion plants was excellent too. I would like to express my gratitude in this connection.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, if this amendment is adopted, it should go after paragraph 28 and not after paragraph 4, because that deals with other institutions. There is no specific recommendation from the Committee on Budgets on this particular point. Personally, I do not have a problem with this. However, I leave it to the wisdom of this House to make a decision, as it is fully familiar with the issue.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the ten elected Members of the , the sum total of the regionalist and nationalist Members within the Group of the , have a problem with recital C. It does state that it is possible to establish regional constituencies for elections, whereby, however – and I quote – “the proportional representation of political families at Member State level must not be undermined”. Could I point out that in the Belgian system, Member State level for European elections is totally irrelevant? Dutch-speakers and French-speakers go to the ballot boxes in two separate constituencies for elections which are totally unrelated to each other. In my opinion, recital C is a liberal interpretation of Article 2 of the Council’s draft decision. Moreover, the different language versions – just read the French, Dutch and English versions – are not identical. The is also struggling with the reference to transnational lists in recital D. In our opinion, this practice will lead to an even greater erosion of political diversity in this hemisphere. Indeed, it is making it even more difficult for smaller political formations to obtain seats at transnational, national and regional level, certainly when this is combined with the 5% electoral threshold. This is why the ten MEPs of the European Fee Alliance will not be endorsing the present recommendation by Mr Gil Robles.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, Mr President of the Commission, it would interest me to know, whether you would deem it useful to comb systematically through all the items in the EU budget in order to establish which of them are conducive to sustainable development? Could we use a best-practice method to identify the budget lines with which we actually do anything substantive to promote sustainable development? Perhaps we could also carry out a benchmarking exercise so that the development of the individual budget lines could be observed. Do you believe that the best-practice method could optimise our performance?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, from all accounts, the human rights situation in China has deteriorated considerably. This is especially true of Tibet, where, for the time being, the Dalai Lama’s reasonable five point plan has no chance of finding its way onto the agenda. The European Union cannot continue to turn a blind eye. The United States presented a resolution on the violation of human rights in China at the fifty-sixth session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. We are extremely concerned by the fact that the Council of the Union has also not yet announced its intention to support this resolution, and this may not be coincidental, since the EU-China dialogue on human rights is at a complete standstill. We call for an end to this policy of turning a blind eye to events in China, and for the European Union to join the American initiative without worrying about losing choice economic opportunities, and to cease this silent and tolerant stance towards the continuous violations of human rights in China, and, in particular, Tibet. Europe is laboriously and extremely inconsistently shaking off her lethargic attitude to the horrors taking place in Chechnya. I sincerely hope that she will follow the example of the United States and, at last, wake up to the human rights situation in China.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Echelon is a source of concern for the people of Europe, not only because it may have been used for unlawful purposes, but, above all, because of the risks inherent in its very nature, for it is an automatic, general, indiscriminate interception system, about the existence of which we can be in no doubt. We need tighter controls to guarantee the fundamental rights of the people and to protect European companies, and we need political initiatives which ensure that the Member States cooperate more closely and keep each other informed of agreements concluded with third countries on this matter. Legislation must be updated and harmonised and supervisory authorities simplified and consolidated and, of course, new technologies are needed to protect telecommunications from disproportionate and unjustified interference. This is a complex assembly of measures which have only been timidly, belatedly and in part announced by the Council and the Commission. Parliament must also support all the measures necessary to ascertain the truth, and be constantly, intensely vigilant even when all this has died down, for without transparent authorities and guaranteed individual rights, there can be no faith in democracy.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, on page 8 of Mr Camisón Asensio’s report, he says: ‘individual citizens are entitled to demand an effective and prompt response to any infringements of their rights or any omissions and delays in this respect’. That is an excellent thing. The Pensioners Party approves, and I personally have approved this report but I wonder when will we succeed in achieving what I have read in this report, and what is right, in Europe in terms of our fifteen Member States paying pensions? There are quite a few where pensions are paid late, even quite a few years late, sometimes decades. We must also commit ourselves, as Europe, to take action to prevent these delays happening any longer. (The sitting was suspended at 1.22 p.m. and resumed at 3 p.m.) IN THE CHAIR: MR ONESTAVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, you will shortly be paying an official visit to the Netherlands. I am very much looking forward to that. My only regret is that you are not planning to take the opportunity to talk to the representatives of the people, European or national. I would like to ask you why you, yourself, as representative of a parliament, avoid contact with parliamentarians when you visit Member States? Why do you only talk to government officials? I am a member of a party in office myself, but I know that the opposition sometimes has very interesting things to say as well.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I shall be voting in favour of all the technical measures aimed at enhancing maritime safety even though, at the same time, I deplore their inadequacy. But the real problem is the political will to adopt and implement measures binding upon all those endangering the community and the environment in order to make a profit. These are not only the shipowners but also, more especially, the contractors, who are large multinationals, as the losses of the Erika and the Ievoli Sun clearly illustrated. These binding measures should involve not only the detention of dangerous ships but also the seizure of such vessels and their contents. What is more, these major companies should be made financially liable to the extent of their assets for any damage that they cause. The fuel dumps of Total and Shell, the charterers of the Erika and the Ievoli Sun respectively, should have been immediately confiscated until all the damage that had been inflicted due to their irresponsibility had been fully compensated. Justice can be merciless towards the poor who are unable to pay a tax or a fine, and will even go so far as to seize their meagre belongings. Laxness towards large companies is indeed a sign that they are more powerful than elected institutions.

Political group: GUE-NGL
chairman of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. – The debate on this dossier in the committee I have the honour to chair has been an excellent example of cooperation between different committees in Parliament and indeed of cooperation between Parliament, the Commission and the Council presidency. When it was voted in committee on Monday night, the text and all 200 amendments were available in all languages. I would like to repeat Mr Cox’s call and ask if you will give this House an assurance that there will be an inquiry into why the final text was not available in French until yesterday afternoon, more than 40 hours after it was adopted in committee. (Applause) The fact is that the debate on this directive has been exemplary – it has been a credit to this Parliament and any attempt to delay that debate or to delay a vote would be a sordid political move for reasons of party political advantage. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
President, as a rights holder I have a financial interest in television. I will not partake in the vote today. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is a fact that the countries of the south-eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East as a whole are an important field of action for the foreign relations of the European Union and the present Commission communication confirms this. It is particularly positive that the Commission recognises that the marginalisation of women undermines political representation and obstructs economic and social development in the area. It is true that women in Mediterranean and Arab countries, despite a certain improvement in conditions over recent years, continue to be the victims of sexual discrimination and inequality. Illiteracy, poverty, domestic violence, inadequate medical and pharmaceutical care, little participation in professional and political life, these are the main features of the life of women on the southern shores of the Mediterranean basin and in the countries of the Middle East. Worst of all, however, is that women are the main victims of religious and political fundamentalism, ultra-conservatism and autocratic regimes which base their power to a large degree on controlling the sexual conduct of women, their way of life, their reproductive functions and even the way they dress. Certainly, the best defence against the powers of retrogression and intolerance is to strengthen the secular aspect of the state and the legal democratic order. Our message must be clear. No political system, religious movement, tradition or custom can take precedence over respect for the fundamental freedoms of women, human rights and the rule of law. The more these basic elements of a democratic state are missing from numerous countries of the Mediterranean, the more the hopes for economic and social development and an improvement in the position of women will remain dim and the resolutions passed by the conferences held within the framework of the Barcelona process will remain dead letter. That is why we are asking the European Commission and the representation of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly to use all the mechanisms at its disposal in order to include clear clauses and commitments on the recognition and protection of human rights and the rights of women and the principles of the rule of law as sine qua non for the development of the countries of the Mediterranean and the elevation of the Mediterranean basin to an area of peace and cooperation.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, many people form the impression that enlargement of the EU is a project which is going to cost an incredible amount of money. That is not an entirely correct description of how things look in reality, as noted as early as during the Berlin Summit in March 1999 when the budget guidelines were drawn up. It was then clearly shown that we can in fact tackle enlargement successfully within the EU’s budget. In the opinion on the Brok report, for which I was responsible and which has been backed by the Committee on Budgets, the conclusion is the same. The vast majority of international investigations point to macroeconomic gains in connection with enlargement. This applies to the candidate countries, but in fact it also applies to all current Member States. To these should be added all the other advantages which cannot be measured in figures or assessed in economic terms. Through enlargement, we shall be participating in the largest common market in the world, with almost 500 million people and 25 per cent of world trade. We shall obtain increased competition and a more rapid process of reform in Western Europe too. Better conditions for economic growth will be created throughout Europe. Albeit in a somewhat longer time-scale, we shall be obtaining a common currency for the whole continent. Together, we shall be able to solve Europe’s cross-border environmental problems. We shall acquire an extended and stable democracy and, with it, opportunities for enduring peace on what has been a constantly war-torn continent. The composite picture of enlargement does not therefore point to insuperable costs but to gains, however the calculations are carried out. They are so great that enlargement ought to be undertaken as soon as it possibly can be.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, as Mr Patten stated, with four aircraft carriers heading towards the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, the very least that can be said of the situation in Afghanistan is that it is uncertain. Even the President of Pakistan – a country where over the last few days there have been huge demonstrations of support for the Taliban regime – has unambiguously stated that the days of the regime are numbered. The offer to open up the government of three Afghan provinces and the exodus of people fleeing the country to avoid being mobilised against potential intervention by the international alliance clearly suggest that this is true. If, to this fact we add the decision made yesterday in Rome to create a Supreme Council of National Unity instructed to form a provisional government and name a Head of State, we can truly arrive at the conclusion that the situation in Afghanistan is changing from one day to the next. So, Madam President, in this context, what attitude should the European Union adopt? Well, in my opinion, the European Union, faced with the crisis situation in this region, should present itself as an element of stability and moderation. The EU should contribute to the establishment of a democratic government in Afghanistan. The EU should encourage the full application in that country of respect for human rights and fundamental liberties, which the Taliban regime refuses to acknowledge, as proposed by the mission led by Commissioner Patten and the Troika. At the same time, the European Union has to sign up to the international alliance referred to yesterday by the Secretary-General of the United Nations at their General Assembly. Lastly, Madam President, the European Union should give its support to an enormous humanitarian task. We should not forget that 25% of the 22 million Afghans will survive thanks exclusively to international aid. However, Madam President, it is important that the European Union does not commit a series of errors. Firstly, that of supporting governments that do not have sufficient popular support, as happened in the first Afghan crisis a decade ago. Secondly, the European Union should not commit the error of carrying out indiscriminate actions and of not pursuing tangible objectives. For we should not forget, Madam President, that our objective should not be to dominate a country that certainly holds a strategic position, but not to encourage the action of extremist elements that could cause the overthrow of regimes such as those in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or Egypt that would make Bin Laden a martyr or a political military leader or, something that would be far more serious, a religious or spiritual leader. I think that in conclusion, Madam President, we need to give our total support to Mr Patten’s proposal and behave with maximum diligence and efficiency to support the Commission’s proposals today.

Political group: PPE-DE
I would, of course, like to thank Mr Danielsson for his brief reply, but it does not really help me. Mr Danielsson, I hope you appreciate the gravity of this matter. I realise that the fourth framework directive cannot offer any direct solace, but some voluntarism on the part of the Council would be in order. The directive affects hundreds of citizens who cannot be remunerated, who suffer a great deal, and a certain level of voluntarism would not go amiss in my opinion. I would remind you of previous action taken. On one occasion, the French President, Mr Chirac, flew to Bern to protect the export of 50 000 bottles of champagne and to galvanise the Swiss Government into action. I also remember a similar case, where Belgium took action to protect Belgian citizens. The Belgian Foreign Minister, Mr Michel, has since got involved. I would therefore really appreciate it if the Council could generate some activity here and ensure that we can in some way help the European citizens, who genuinely become the victims of the bad handling of affairs between the European Union, the insurance companies and the Swiss insurance companies. I am telling you, this is really about people who suffer from this state of affairs. I have personally met people who have been fighting for their cause for over eighteen years. This is unacceptable in my opinion.

Political group: Verts-ALE
We cannot vote for such a falsely pacifist and humanist resolution, whose only goal is to clear the consciences of MEPs while justifying in advance the warmongering machinations of Mr Bush and the imperialistic accomplices who will follow his lead. The references to international law and to the decisions of the UN Security Council are only there in order to better support the masquerade over the danger of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction and the need for international monitoring, etc. This whole inspection is simply a pretext, and the resolution seeks to give weight to a vulgar pretext to justify in advance the probable mass massacre of the Iraqi population by the weapons of mass destruction of the Americans and company. Iraq is no more dictatorial a country than its Arab neighbours. However, it is the only country being targeted, and without any particular reason in comparison with its neighbours. If democracies wish to defend democracy, women’s rights and political and union freedoms in Middle Eastern countries, as they say they do, they should do so, but not by planning the cold-blooded massacre of the Iraqi people. So much duplicity, so much cynicism concealed under the cover of a well-meaning attitude when we are talking about the death and destitution of hundreds of thousands of human beings should be unreservedly condemned.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I just wish to explain something: Mrs Damião has been suffering from quite a serious illness. Consequently, she has not been able to attend this vote or be involved in drafting the report. On behalf of Portugal’s delegation, I wish to thank the House, in particular the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, for the support they have given her, which has given a serious intellectual boost to her recovery. (Applause) *** Report (A5-0364/2002) by Mrs Ieke van den Burg, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the European Investment Bank annual report for 2001 [2001/2256(INI)] Regarding Amendment No 4

Political group: PSE
Mr President, various Members, such as Mr Beysen, who has disappeared and reappeared in the meantime, and Mrs Gebhardt, have already remarked that there are fewer Members in the Chamber than earlier this morning. It is clear to us too that there are now even less than half of the Members here than there were earlier on. The Members who have left are a mixture of Members who supported me in my request for a quorum and those who heavily protested against it. It seems to me to be a good thing that this debate has got under way and I would like to extend warm thanks to the Members who supported me in this. I also welcome the fact that, clearly, the choice is not about retaining or abolishing Fridays, but very much about improving the present situation.

Political group: Verts-ALE