GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, we are facing a very complex European Council, and I should like to wish the Danish Presidency every success in this. We owe it to the presidency, the European Union as it stands now, as well as the candidate countries to be able to take some serious decisions. Crucial decisions will need to be taken within a few months, and in my view it is especially regrettable that we are still finding out that 79% of the people in Europe are claiming to be badly informed. This is not only regrettable, but also very dangerous, because a huge number of people in Europe – indeed in all the Member States – feel uncertain and unsafe. This uncertainty and lack of information about enlargement only serves to intensify these negative feelings. I think it is high time we explained to people that enlargement could be a springboard for a safer Europe, a Europe that gives them greater security, and it is also high time we reassured them that Europe need not become less social, less prosperous or even less democratic as a result. It is high time we told them that – and started working on that. This is why, just as our group chairman asked the President of the Commission, I should like the Commission to tell me exactly what its information plan looks like, and I should also like to ask the President-in-Office of the Council whether it might not be a good idea to discuss this with the government leaders at this important European Council after all? Large-scale European information campaigns with sizeable advertisements in major newspapers may help to some extent, but the euro campaign has taught us that we should make use of decentralised information methods. We must involve the governments and civil society in the Member States. If we do not, people will never be sufficiently informed. Are there such plans in the pipeline? Are there plans afoot to quickly set up a campaign in this way? Mr President-in-Office of the Council, taking into consideration the fact that quite a number of governments in Europe have left a great deal to be desired in this area, will you be quizzing your fellow government leaders about this?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, to analyse this year zero of the Tampere era we have, for the first time, a tool that will be extraordinarily useful, both now and in the future: the scoreboard set up by the Commission which, in future years, should include the progress made in the Council and the progress made in each of the Member States. A comparison between the initial forecasts and the latest revision of the scoreboard shows, for instance, how we have progressed – I would say remarkably – in matters of judicial cooperation. We have hopes for the future of Eurojust and this Parliament welcomes the decisions taken by the Council and the Member States’ initiatives which, in the field of judicial cooperation, have added to the Commission proposals, thus creating a circle that should be maintained in future. My Group also values the highly significant Commission communication on the mutual recognition of sentences in criminal matters. We hope it will be a solid base from which to combat crime, especially those more callous and intolerable versions such as terrorism. Ministers, we are well aware of what the European Commission has presented this last year in connection with the Tampere Agenda: it is on the scoreboard. What we do not know is what the Council is thinking of doing with them in the immediate future. In exchange, we have seen concrete and fragmentary proposals – I do not want to return to the debate we had in the previous sitting – from each Member State, which in this case we cannot accept at all, either now or in the future. Today we have also talked about the shock caused by the arrival of the “East Sea” in Europe. It shocked everyone, and I think it would have done so even more if the citizens knew that even before Tampere we had set up something which (talking of cooperation with the countries of origin) is called an action plan for northern Iraq, i.e. the Kurds. But the citizens do not know. Just as those of my country do not know that we have set up an action plan for Morocco, and while they keep finding the bodies of our young neighbours on their beaches they wonder what the European Union is doing. In fact, the impression given by the press is that not even our government knows. Laeken is going to be a new opportunity for the common immigration and asylum policy. Please do not just reaffirm the Tampere decisions again. Tell us how you intend to move forward. Please do not repeat that things are on the right road. Really convince yourselves that your decisions are good ones, and uphold them clearly and with determination and courage. Parliament – and I am sure in this respect the citizens too – will follow.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, I should like, first of all, to thank our rapporteur, Mr Bradbourn, who has taken a great deal of trouble to come up with a report which now seems to me to be perfectly acceptable. Naturally we are pleased that the new guidelines being proposed to us for the TENs are moving towards and are in line with the policy of sustainable mobility which was proposed to us in the White Paper. I believe that this cohesion was absolutely necessary and I consider, personally, that the new objectives which have been proposed to us are probably sustainable objectives which will go beyond the other re-focussing phases of these projects. We also warmly welcome the six new major specific projects, in particular Galileo. We in this Parliament approved this project with a large majority, and we have seen what an impact it has had. I also warmly welcome, on my own account, the links through the Pyrenees, because it cannot be repeated too often that the Pyrenees pose a problem which is just as acute as the one posed by the Alps. However, this report raises two series of problems. The first problem concerns the definition procedure of Annex III. How can we avoid Parliament becoming a sort of auction of a certain number of local and regional projects, without any budgetary responsibility, which would eventually lead to Parliament being discredited, because of course we all have our favourite projects in our own regions, and in our own towns and villages? Moreover, how can we ensure that these projects are not snatched away and removed from the free will of those who represent the people, in other words Parliament? I do not think that we have settled this question properly, and we shall have to think about it in terms of procedure. For our part, we have decided to support, on a provisional basis, the Annex III proposed by the Commission, but I wish to make it quite clear that I do not consider it to be satisfactory. The second problem is that of funding. I believe, Commissioner, that it will be necessary to take a very strong initiative on the question of funding the TENs. In a way we are parading, at European level, a responsibility and an option without resources. When you look at the work that has been carried out, this is not satisfactory. I personally believe that, in addition to the proposals that you will be making to us on the system of charging for the use of the infrastructure, perhaps you could also include the idea of a large loan to finance the TENs and to accelerate their implementation. If you were to launch such an initiative, there are a number of us who would support it.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the forthcoming signing of a partnership agreement between Egypt and the European Union must enable us, particularly in the field of human rights, to iron out the difficulties faced on the ground by the various associations that defend these rights. However, we must not systematically give way to urgent resolutions and I believe that, in the institutional relationships of confidence which have clearly been established between the European Union and Egypt, it would have been preferable to base our own opinion, our own debate, on the steps that certain Members of Parliament have already taken in this Chamber. That is why, for my part – and it is my own opinion that I am expressing here and not necessarily that of my group – I think that this resolution is premature and that the situation was conducive to examining the human rights situation with a view to improving conditions in Egypt under the Association Agreement.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, our welcome to the Irish Presidency is very sincere, for we know it to be an opportunity for Europe when a small country like yours sets to work in full awareness of its European and global task. You are also an example to the new Member States, in that you made a success of your own accession, both for your own people and for the whole of Europe. As regionalists and representatives of stateless peoples, we expect from Ireland more understanding for our aspirations towards autonomy and maintaining our own identity, as towards direct participation in European decision-making. Whether we are Scotland, Wales, the Basque country, Catalonia, Galicia or Flanders, we expect the same level of respect from the EU as the Baltic States or the Scandinavian countries. You can expect our wholehearted support for your prioritisation of a sound European Constitution and for your ambition to make Europe a more effective player at world level for the benefit of peace and sustainable development. We therefore hope that you will, for example, continue to curb the arms trade and will ensure that the rules of the code of conduct are observed in the process. Ireland boasts long experience in the dialogue with the peoples of the Middle East and as a donor and partner of the countries in Africa, but the millennium agenda should be incorporated more effectively in our day-to-day goals, also as a European Union. It is no small feat to have the ambition to halve, by 2015, the number of poor who have to survive on less than 1 dollar a day. How much progress have we made on this score? I could, however, also mention the other objectives. I should like to make a specific appeal with regard to debt reduction, because many poor countries have to swim along in this global world sea with a millstone of debt around their necks. Finally, I hope that sustainable development will not remain an empty shell where it involves our own European policy on sugar, cotton or rice, for that is what we will be judged on.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I too would like to congratulate Mrs Smet on this own-initiative report and on the thorough, comprehensive document before us. The wage gap between men and women is a well-known phenomenon which is present in all the States of the Union, although in different proportions, and the issue has been on our agendas for a long time now. Previous speakers have mentioned the World Labour Organisation Convention of 1951, the provisions of the Treaty of Rome, the 1995 directive and the Treaty of Amsterdam. A great deal has been done, including in terms of the measures to be taken. The Commission has been presenting recommendations for over 10 years now, sometimes at Parliament’s request; I also remember the code of conduct prepared by the Commission which sought to raise awareness in the Member States and the two sides of industry in order to take practical action in this field. Although the information is still not complete, analysis of the phenomenon allows us to understand the reasons for the existence of the differentials. There are structural reasons, which have been recorded, such as age, training, seniority, and precarious and part-time work, in which mainly women are employed. However, there is also genuine discrimination, direct discrimination – in some cases there is unequal pay for equal work – but, above all, value discrimination: women’s work is still considered to be of less value than men’s, even when they have the same qualifications and responsibilities. Here is an example from my country: it was only in the mid-1980’s, after 15 years of campaigning, that a pay rise was at last obtained in the textile workers’ pay agreement for the category of workers ‘packing supervisor’, which exists in the textiles sector. This only happened, that is, when women lost their jobs during restructuring in this profession, which had been a typically female profession, and men began to be employed as well. I feel that this is a tangible example of an issue which was only resolved in Italy in the mid-80s and which still remains unresolved today in a great many other situations. The rapporteur has made numerous proposals and, in my opinion, we should follow her recommendations. The Commissioner and the Commission are very open to such proposals and the employment guidelines for 2002 make this a priority too.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the slaughter of the Berbers is a fresh reminder of Algeria’s horrific reality. Once again, our courageous foreign affairs ministers have decided to put their heads in the sand. The entire world is being condemned, except for Algeria. However, neither the oil interests, nor the current negotiations are enough to keep the gross human rights violations under wraps. The MEDA agreements demand respect for diversity. One third of the Algerian population are Berbers. Pluriformity should form part of the state fabric. Cultural, linguistic, but mainly social rights must be recognised if Algeria wishes to become a Treaty partner. It is questionable whether we should enter into an agreement with Algeria where human rights are being violated on such a massive scale, even by government officials. In my view, this can only be done if the government assures us that it will make every attempt to prevent the wrong-doings, and to prosecute and bring to justice those responsible, from whatever quarter. An agreement on judicial cooperation is only meaningful if this is given substance by the Algerians. At this moment in time, I still have grave doubts as to whether that is the case. If I look back on ten years of oppression and extreme violence, I am shocked by the statistics. One hundred and fifty thousand killed and on top of that, 10 000 people who have disappeared without a trace, and Europe remains silent. President Bouteflika constantly promises to contain the violence. He pledges to investigate the recent tragedy in Kabylia, but will the guilty be punished? I should like to reiterate it: the State’s most fundamental task is to protect its population. It is shameful that the Algerian authorities should not be able to put an end to the abhorrent reality in their country.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, while welcoming the programme presented to us today I must express some alarm that on page 12, under 'Key initiatives – sustainable and inclusive economy', the mountain has laboured and made a promise to produce a green paper on public services or services of economic interest. I find this extraordinary. This Parliament has repeatedly pointed out to the Commission and the Council over many years that there is an urgent need for a directive on a framework for services of general economic interest. My understanding is that the spring summit instructed the Commission to come forward with a proposal for a framework for services of a general interest by the end of this year. Yet what we have in this work programme for next year is the promise of a green paper to discuss the principles on which services of general economic interest might – might – be constructed. At the same time, we have a promise on page 12 that measures to complete the internal market, by eliminating barriers to the provision and take-up of services by business and consumers, will proceed next year. I do not find this acceptable. This House and the spring summit have been ignored. All the calls this House has made for universal services of general interest to the citizens of Europe to be guaranteed as a matter of urgency have been ignored, although this is a key part of European citizenship and of the social model we are so proud of in Europe. I would like a clear answer from the Commission as to why it is failing to do what this Parliament has asked it to do and what it was instructed to do by the Council at the spring summit, because this is not acceptable.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it was with utter disgust that we witnessed the massacres in Kalimantan, which are unprecedented in their brutality. This is a clear case of ethnic tensions having got out of hand, as is evident in various places in Indonesia: Timor, Aceh, the Moluccas and Irian Jaya. In West Kalimantan, the riots broke out as early as 1997 and 1999 and, across the country, these are, in actual fact, the result of the imposed transmigration programme of 1960. But under the expert, dictatorial rod of iron, all these tensions remained under the surface, and they are now all of a sudden erupting with a vengeance. In my opinion, the international community has to take great care and must make sure that it is ready to grant the lawful government the necessary aid, for the poor are fighting the poor and, at the end of the day, this is an issue of poverty.

Political group: Verts-ALE
We have voted in favour of the overall motion for a resolution, because it is most promising at a time when it is very necessary to strengthen the EU’s defence and security policy. Where collective defence is concerned, we attach importance to NATO’s remaining the indispensable link binding the United States to Europe’s security interests, and we continue to attach great importance to the maintenance of good transatlantic relations. We cannot, however, support the Member States’ and the candidate countries’ being called upon to apply the principle of Community preference in purchasing arms, in order in that way to guarantee the security of supply. As liberals, we support in this case too the principle of the open market economy, for that is what will guarantee arms purchases of the highest quality. We have declined to vote in favour of the desire for a protocol to the Treaty, adding a collective defence clause for those Member States that wish to divide the obligations embedded in Article V of the Brussels Treaty and so bring the Western European Union to an end. We believe that responsibility for Danish security lies first and foremost with NATO.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, with the agreement of the coordinators of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, I should like to propose an oral amendment to Amendment No 2, which is, by the way, equivalent to Amendment No 40. The intention is to strengthen this amendment. The original wording of Paragraph 6, which would be hereby amended, indicates that the purpose of the exercise should be to achieve a balance between economic and political integration of the Union. The authors of the amendment also wanted to mention social integration. So to strengthen the amendment I propose adding three words. The amendment would then read as follows: '...between the economic integration of the Union already in place and its social and political integration.' The words 'already in place' would therefore be added.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, may I express the solidarity of my Group with all those who are on hunger strike in Turkish prisons. Nevertheless, I wish to urge them to call off their strike, because we in the European Parliament, and the Council of Europe too, are trying to improve the situation together with the Turkish authorities; we are certainly being critical of the Turkish Government, but we are working with them to try and ensure that the new prisons improve rather than exacerbate conditions for prisoners. May I also take this occasion to say that it is, of course, not only a matter of there being too many political prisoners – the fact that a country applying for membership of the European Union has any political prisoners at all merits outright condemnation – but that we are also aware of the way in which the existing prisons and the conditions that prevail within them have led to various criminal activities emanating from Turkish prisons. Turkey has every right to prevent such activities but, at the same time, it must ensure that all prisoners in Turkish jails are treated humanely, decently and as individuals, and we are utterly uncompromising in our commitment to this principle. Tunisia

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, in my capacity as Chairman of the EP delegation for relations with Central Asia, I shall confine myself to a few comments concerning those budget lines. What are they about? In the first instance, they are about aid to the partner countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Central Asia is an unstable region and has, since the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan, really been at the epicentre of world politics. We all know that military action on its own will not bring a sustainable solution in the region and that we will need to invest in democratic institutions, in a civil society, in socio-economic and ecological reforms, in the fight against drugs and poverty and in sound education. Mr President-in-Office of the Council, that is the key aim of our efforts in Central Asia. Hence our call to increase that budget line by 5% for commitment appropriations and by 20% for payment appropriations. Secondly, I should like to ask you to give your attention to the aid for victims of radiation, particularly in the Semipalatinsk region in Kazakhstan. In that region, the Soviet army carried out 607 nuclear arms tests between 1949 and 1999, the bulk of which were above-ground. The Soviets obliged the population to come out of their houses and watch the huge nuclear mushroom. The effects are catastrophic: the incidence of cancer is five times higher than the national average, birth defects are three times more common than the national average, many young men are impotent and twelve-year old girls suffer from breast cancer. Psychological disorders and suicide are very common, and the average life expectancy is around 52. That is the reason why, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, we would like to increase the payment appropriations in budget line B7-524 from EUR 45 million to 60 million. Mr Vande Lanotte, you are visiting our House and attending the sitting. You said you have come to listen, rather than make any comments, and I can understand that. However, I should nevertheless like to draw your devoted and kind attention to these two important amendments and maybe, upon completion of this 2002 budgetary procedure, we could visit Semipalatinsk together to witness the disastrous effects of the nuclear insanity and to see how European money could be spent in a effective and useful manner. I would be much obliged. IN THE CHAIR: MR PUERTAVice-President

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I rise to ask again whether you have finished checking the split vote on Amendment No 36. You were going to check it and announce the result. My group asked for a separate vote on Amendment No 36. You have voted only on the first part. I would like you to vote on Part 2 now.

Political group: PPE-DE