GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I welcome moves to improve relations with Iran. But we must always take account of the fact that human rights in Iran are, if anything, getting worse and not better. Iran is continuing to fund terrorist groups such as Hizbollah who are active in the Middle East. In particular, Iran funds terrorist groups that are still holding hostage a number of Israeli soldiers who are officially posted as missing in action. If Iran is serious about developing better relationships with the West, it ought to put pressure on those groups to release those soldiers. In particular, I would draw Parliament's attention to the case of Ron Arad, an Israeli air force officer who, in 1986, was captured by a Shi'ite militia group in Lebanon. He was then in 1987 sold to another group which was funded and run by Iran. He has not been seen since 1987; his daughter was an infant when he was taken hostage. Would it not be an appropriate message for this season of goodwill if she could at long last see her father who disappeared 15 years ago? Please would Iran help these soldiers be released if it is serious about developing peace with the rest of the world. - Van den Burg report (A5-0388/2001)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Mr Bourlanges is entirely right on the procedure: it would make sense to have a single vote instead of three votes on that. I would, however, point out that if we follow him on the substance, then Parliament would be contradicting what we voted both in his own reports and in my recent report on revising the Rules of Procedure. I would urge colleagues not to follow him on the substance, although he is right on the procedure.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, our history is one of boundaries that we cross, a history of walls that we pull down after having built them. This is because a wall, Mr President, can be rebuilt, but a life cannot, and I agree with Mrs Morgantini when she says that it is not enough to call for international law to be respected. Does international law allow a State to protect terrorist cells that are going to attack the civil population of another State? I ask you that. I agree with her when she says that it is our duty to intervene and I share her indignation that we cannot be happy with moral stances, as we so often are, stances that ease our consciences, but, ladies and gentlemen, a clear conscience is the opposite of real conscience. Yes, Mr Cohn-Bendit, we need a political shock! Nor can I let it be said that this wall is the same as the Berlin wall, as I heard mentioned just now. I personally am against this wall, because I am against the line that it follows. A wall dividing one nation in two and a wall that aims to create a border, even if the border is completely open to argument, cannot, however, be considered to be the same thing. I would like to add that I was one of those that signed a petition against the line the wall follows, in particular at Abu Dis. Everyone is calling for a return to the 1967 borders and I am surprised to note that today there are passionate calls for what, yesterday, was rejected just as passionately. This is because, in the end, what the more moderate amongst us are asking for today, is nothing more than a return to the Clinton parameters, the parameters that were recently rejected altogether. Mr Monti quite rightly said that Hamas and Islamic Jihad do not recognise Israel’s right to exist, as the suicide attacks have shown. We are deeply embroiled in the matter and there is in actual fact not just one conflict; there are four. There is a war being waged by the Palestinian authority for the legitimate liberation of the Palestinian state and we are supporting it. There is war being waged by the Israeli State for its safety. We are supporting this too. There is also, and this has to be said, a type of colonial war being waged by some Israelis and there is, and we really cannot overlook this one, a war to destroy the Israeli State being waged by some Palestinian factions. If we are not aware of these four conflicts then we cannot understand what is happening.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the excellent report by Mr Brie needs little comment. In my opinion, it gives a good account of the problems with the new constitution. It makes it clear that there are good reasons for possibly delaying the elections by a few months, and emphasises once again the need to further improve the situation of women. The tragedy is, however, that, with this report in our hands and the Commission’s good intentions, we have sadly found ourselves in a position where we may well be full of good intentions and have excellent plans, but neither the European Parliament nor even the European Commission has any influence on the circumstances under which those plans have to be carried out, namely the lack of security. There is a growing number of reports from NGOs stating that twelve aid workers were killed last year, for example. A growing number of reports from NGOs reveal that there is a very large number of good projects that they are unable to carry out. The Commissioner, too, referred to EUR 30 million of projects that, sadly, cannot be carried out owing to the lack of security. This week, we have once more seen the newspapers full of splendid plans for rapid reaction forces. That is great when it comes to preventing bloodshed in Africa, but it must not be at the expense of less sexy projects, so to speak, such as the difficult development work in Afghanistan. After all, the Member States of the European Union now have a good deal to say for themselves in the way of promises, magnificent things that should be done, but soldiers are not going there, they are going there far too little, and that is the key problem. I believe that there are hardly any fellow Members from the Group of the European People’s Party still here, but I should like to call them to account on a mistake they made in December, in my view. They convinced Parliament that we should cut the aid to Afghanistan – yes, you heard right – because drug trafficking is not being tackled. The fact that drug trafficking is not being tackled is a direct consequence of the omission on the part of EU Member States to send any troops to Afghanistan, which contributes to dependence on warlords for the maintenance of order by such troops as are there, and consequently makes those troops reluctant to tackle opium trafficking. We must avoid a situation where we fail to keep our promises again, where Afghanistan sinks into an opium economy, led by warlords, and – my greatest concern – where the hopes of many Afghans, particularly Afghan women, are dashed once again. We must not allow this to happen.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, since the Lisbon European Council set itself the target of making the EU the world’s most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy by 2010 – an economy that can create sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion – we can ask ourselves how matters have developed since then. In short, nothing has happened. The increases in the United States’s and our own competitiveness have been so markedly different that the discrepancies between the United States and the EU have increased, rather than decreased, since that target was set. We therefore have a very great problem, and all we can say is that, up until now, the Lisbon strategy has not worked at all and that the target is now even further away than it was when it was adopted. As will have become apparent from the debate in Parliament, there is too much bureaucracy and there are too many regulations. What we lack is training, better access to capital and a long list of structural changes to enable us to cope successfully in the new knowledge-based economy. The key to progress will be more basic research so that the new knowledge can quickly be converted into exciting, well-paid and interesting jobs. I want to say that Mr Mann’s report is a step in the right direction in promoting economic growth and increasing the number of jobs in the Member States. He emphasises the importance of small and medium-sized businesses and sets out a long list of initiatives that I believe will enhance the process.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, following the tragic events of last week in the Aegean, yesterday's suspension of over 60 Greek passenger ships which do not comply with EU laws is, I am sure, welcomed by the whole House. In addition to passing on our condolences – which I am glad to note you already have – and our gratitude to all those involved in the rescues in those tragic events, could the President ask next week's Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism to investigate why 79 people had to die before these ships were banned? That committee needs to ask urgently why Member States are ignoring EU maritime safety laws – it is not just Greece. We need to ask that committee to review why certain Member States are granted lengthy opt-outs from those maritime safety laws.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, the rapporteur, Mr Rothley, has unfortunately been detained today at an important meeting in Luxembourg and has asked me to stand in for him today and, in fact, to speak on his behalf, which is something I am happy to do. With the fifth draft directive on motor vehicles, we want further to improve the protection of accident victims and, at the same time, take account of the requirements of the internal market. What are we proposing? Firstly, any loss arising out of a traffic accident in the European Union – whether those involved are from the same or from different countries – ought, in future, to be settled within a reasonable period. Otherwise, there should be the threat of financial sanctions. Secondly, the sum insured ought, in future, to amount to at least EUR 2 million, irrespective of the number of victims and the nature of the losses. I have doubts, however, as to whether this amount will be sufficient. In December 1998, a British judge decided the case of a Dutch student who had broken his neck in an accident and since been paralysed from neck to toe. The court awarded the accident victim compensation of approximately GBP 9 million, some GBP 8 million of which related to purely financial loss. Thirdly, there are still doubts as to who is obliged to assume liability for an accident caused by a vehicle without a number plate or with a false or stolen number plate. In such cases, we need clear regulations in favour of the accident victim. In future, compensation should be paid from the guarantee fund of the country in which the accident occurred. Take, for example, the case of a Dutch hit-and-run driver who causes an accident in Italy with a vehicle stolen in Poland that has false German number plates. Who is liable? In future, it should be the Italian guarantee fund alone, which would obviously try to obtain redress. Fourthly, the period for which a policyholder working temporarily in another Member State is protected ought, in future, to be increased to twelve months. During this period, he ought neither to have to register a new address for his vehicle nor to have to effect a new insurance policy. Those are only some of the proposals. They are really there for the purpose of tying up loose ends. At a later stage, we shall deal with the real problems of the future, i.e. reform of the compensation provided for non-material losses in the European Union. We discussed this last year in Trier at the Academy of European Law: in other words, the protection of pedestrians and cyclists as vulnerable road users. That was the theme in Trier this year at the Second European Road Traffic Law Conference: in other words, the accident victim’s right to claim directly against his own insurer. I consider that to be a modern concept. The Commission should therefore set to work.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is great to hear the Commission, the Council and Parliament commit themselves so strongly to enlargement, as has happened here today. Beneath the happy surface, however, there are of course anxieties, also on the part of the people in the candidate countries, and we must listen to these. As the Commissioner also said, these anxieties cannot be conjured away. We must not in any way postpone enlargement, but we must listen to countries’ requests for transitional arrangements, whether on the subjects of land purchase or the environment. An agreement is only sound if both parties are satisfied. We must not make demands of others that we do not make of ourselves. I am thinking in this context, for example, of the environmental demands for waste water treatment with which Brussels does not yet, of course, comply. We must therefore be willing to listen to those countries which wish us to be flexible. Enlargement is not merely a gift to them on our part. It is also a gift from them to ourselves. We want them to accede to the EU with their values and their knowledge of what it means not to have freedom and democracy, for that is the most important thing of all. It is perhaps they who know most of all about this, for it is they who have experienced the loss of freedom and democracy.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, every time there is a killing in the Basque Country or in Spain, and this House carries out its dignified ritual of condemning these criminal acts and holding a minute’s silence, we are forced to listen to an MEP, a specialist in funeral addresses, taking the opportunity to spread his propaganda on a programme which we would respect if it were not tragically accompanied by crime and murder. It is an unworthy and, above all, completely pointless exercise which is going to convince no-one in this House. I would ask him to apply his energy and his speaking skills, if he has any, to convincing his friends to stop their murdering. Thank you very much, Madam President. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
The issue of integrated coastal zone management is of crucial importance to my constituents in Scotland. As the Commission highlights in its proposal, this is not just a local problem, but is of critical importance for all Europeans. As Mrs Langenhagen said, one third of EU citizens live close to, if not on, these areas. Research has revealed a worrying deterioration in the environmental, socio-economic and cultural resources of our coastal zones. We see aggressive competition between users of these resources. The environmental problems include habitat destruction, water contamination, coastal erosion and resource depletion and these are all very serious. These environmental problems have a knock-on effect beyond coastal regions to inland regions. The roots of the problem include a lack of knowledge, a failure to involve stake-holders and, therefore, a lack of cooperation between the relevant administrative bodies. At a recent videoconference in Scotland House, that is the home of the Scottish Executive in Brussels, it was interesting to see how the different local authorities in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland were already working within local partnerships with stake-holders to protect the coastal zone. It gave me great encouragement that action was being taken and that the coastal zone was being given the importance it rightly deserved. It is, after all, at local level that a real difference will be made. In conclusion, we need to encourage strong action at a local level which we are seeing already in Scotland, and we need to exchange best practice across the EU in order that our coastal zones can be enjoyed as much by this generation as by the next.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, you will not be surprised that, as a British Conservative, I am going to sound a slightly discordant note in these otherwise harmonious proceedings. I agree that it is right that all the institutions of the EU should observe the same standard norms, but I am still less convinced that such legal constraints need to be included in the Convention. I also feel that they should not be enforceable by the EU on Member States beyond the present commitment represented by their signatures on the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. They should not apply to private companies, individuals or organisations, nor should they cover matters of social affairs, employment or cultural policy. We are being presented with a vehicle filled with good intentions. However, I fear we are also opening up a nightmare of duality in the appeal, on the one hand, the European Court of Human Rights and, on the other, the European Court of Justice. We have cases changing from one to the other, profiting only the lawyers. I am sorry for those of my colleagues who are distinguished lawyers, I do not wish them any diminution in their profits, but this is not something we should encourage. Recital V shows that this is already happening. The prospect of conflicting authorities being announced in the two courts is bureaucratically intolerable and a judicial nightmare. Paragraph 2 also concerns me. The Charter must bind the Commission, the Council, Parliament and the Committee of the Regions, but should it be a 'central reference point for the European Court of Justice and national courts'? No, it should not be a central reference point of national courts. This is another indication of the potential for confusion. This confusion must be sorted out before this report is adopted. I urge Parliament to reject this report and allow the committee to resolve it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I voted for Mr Schmid’s report on employment but, as representative of the Pensioners’ Party and all pensioners, I would stress before the House – which listens equally carefully to the explanations of vote of all the Members and, in particular, as we know and as we can see, to my own – that it is possible to both balance states’ books and increase pensions if we can only manage to administer better the money handed over to the state by workers and citizens during their working lives which is to be restored to them subsequently when they grow old. There is too much wastage, too many people interested in receiving money who do not deserve it. If we put our finances in order we will be able to have lower taxes and duties, smaller contributions and larger pensions.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the essential message of this splendid report, which the strongly supports, the central message really is that national parliaments could, and should, contribute more to the political system of the European Union. But they ought to focus on what they do best and not tread upon the prerogatives of the European Parliament. What national parliaments must improve on doing is to scrutinise and check the executive power of the Council. What they do worst is to second-guess the legislative powers of the European Parliament. That is why we firmly reject the British proposals to insert a third legislative chamber composed of national MPs, whose function would be 'to police subsidiarity'. Such a national cuckoo inside the federal nest would shatter the codecision procedure, which is the key formula in the Union's own march towards becoming a mature post-national parliamentary democracy. Such a chamber would be stuffed with dutiful poodles of the Council, making a mockery of parliamentary involvement in European affairs at the national level. I trust the British government will listen to the debate on this question in the Convention and then withdraw its dangerous and obscurantist proposal.

Political group: ELDR
I view the increasingly aggressive stance of the Israeli Government towards the Palestinian people with the deepest concern. The recent series of threats by the Israeli Government to expel Yasser Arafat, which culminated in the Deputy Prime Minister’s suggestion that he be assassinated, is totally unacceptable and despicable. The United Nations General Assembly has criticised the Israeli Government in this connection. The United States veto of a UN Security Council resolution to this effect (a vote from which, moreover, Germany and the United Kingdom abstained) is deplorable. The EU cannot simply, in the words of the statement by the Presidency of the European Union, express ‘its deep preoccupation’, ask ‘the Israeli Government to refrain from any use of force and, in particular, from the expulsion of President Arafat’, or consider the Israeli Government and the Palestinian people as equals. To do so is to ape the stance of the United States. It is essential to put significant pressure on the Israeli authorities with a view to ending the military occupation, the killings, the annexing of Palestinian territory, the building of the wall to control the movements of Palestinians, and, in general, the campaign of pure state terrorism being conducted against the Palestinian people. There is an urgent need to show solidarity with the Palestinian people. Peace will come only when the Palestinian people’s inalienable and widely-acknowledged right to their own independent, sovereign state becomes reality.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam Commissioner, on a certain occasion in September, you said that we should declare war on Hollywood in order to strengthen the European film industry. The only problem there is that our best warriors emigrate to Hollywood. Commissioner, malicious gossip has it that you could be open to challenge, in purely legal terms, for awarding the European Film Prize in Cannes on behalf of MEDIA Plus, since the prize may have been funded from the MEDIA II budget. Be that as it may, we shall not criticise you. On the contrary, we are grateful for the tremendous vigour with which you have been tackling the entire cultural agenda. I have read in the press that we in the European Parliament could possibly upset the timetable because we are pressing for parliamentary codecision. I do not think this is the case. We have the political will to see that this programme begins on time. As directly elected representatives of the people, we also have a legal and moral right to be part of the decision-making process in the field of cultural policy. Madam Commissioner, we make an earnest appeal for a constructive dialogue with you and with the Council on this specific issue.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I do not agree. There are languages which are not spoken by many people but which are nevertheless national languages, such as Luxemburgish. This is not a minority language; it may become one as a result of immigration, but it is not a minority language. Admittedly it is not widely spoken, but this proposal is unacceptable.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I am glad to hear that the Spanish Presidency assures us that the Council will play a leadership role at Johannesburg. However, if it is going to, then it will have to get its act together very fast. The Commissioner complains that the G-77 is insisting on the Global Solidarity Pact. But what they wanted was essentially the money that was promised to them ten years ago, which was supposed to pay for the implementation of the Rio agreements agreed then. No wonder they have no faith in the North, which has not produced that money yet. On trade, the Commissioner says that if Johannesburg focuses on trade issues we will lose the focus on sustainable development. The point is that you cannot separate trade and sustainable development. If people are to have secure access to water, we cannot pressure them into privatising their water supplies under the GATS agreement. If people are to have secure access to food, we cannot keep dumping agricultural products on their markets. It seems that it was agricultural subsidies in the EU that yet again broke one of the deals on the table. There is extraordinary hypocrisy in demanding subsidy reduction and neo-liberal economic policies in the South while practising old-fashioned northern protectionism in the North.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I have a quite specific supplementary question for the Commissioner. There are recurrent debates in this House about what precisely is meant by the expression ‘reproductive health’, and that also features in our choice of organisations. I just wanted to ask you, Commissioner, whether the expression ‘reproductive health’ includes abortion or excludes it.

Political group: PPE-DE