GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I believe we can say with satisfaction that the European Parliament has worked to ensure that Euro-Mediterranean relations are a priority with the European Union’s foreign policy. This very afternoon we are going to deal with the strategy for a broader Europe – the Napoletano report – in which we point out the strategic importance of a more solid and global relationship with our Mediterranean partners and neighbours. Within this context, the Euro-Mediterranean Foreign Ministers Conference in Naples is going to conclude an objective which has long been pursued by this Parliament, which is the transformation of the Euro-Mediterranean Forum into a genuine assembly. I believe that this represents a clear message in favour of strengthening this relationship in all areas and it must have a fundamental objective, which is to guarantee that Euro-Mediterranean cooperation functions correctly, because this new assembly will allow for the monitoring of the correct application of the European Union's association agreements with each and every one of our Mediterranean partners and that monitoring has been widely requested by the European Parliament. Given the broad content of each of these agreements, which includes clauses of a political nature, which go beyond the purely economic elements, the task of the assembly in practice would be the political control of relationships between each side of the Mediterranean. From now on, I believe we must make progress in four areas. Firstly, facilitating freedom of exchanges. The closer we get to establishing an area of free trade, the more we will contribute to economic and social development, facilitating the emergence of positive synergies. Secondly, on the definitive implementation of a Euro-Mediterranean cultural foundation, and I hope that this conference will adopt specific decisions in this area. Thirdly, we must combat human-trafficking mafias more decisively, and this involves more active participation in the fight against illegal immigration. Finally, Mr President, I believe we must not forget countries which are not part of the Barcelona process – I am referring to Libya and Mauritania. Parliament’s delegation for relations with the Maghreb is going to make them a priority in its efforts over the coming weeks and months. I will end, Mr President, by saying that I believe there are reasons for us to be happy with this impulse, which will be given institutional shape in Naples, and which will allow us to work on new initiatives.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, the way in which the Buitenweg report is being handled is completely unacceptable, and this has far less to do with the report itself than the actual procedure we are adopting. In fact there is an arrangement within the European Parliament that when reports are only voted on for the first time during a committee meeting here in Strasbourg, they do not then feature on the agenda in that same part-session. That is the usual arrangement. Now a decision was obviously taken last Thursday, in the Conference of Presidents – at which I was represented as I could not be there in person – to deviate from this rule, but only to do so if all translations were present and correct by 7.00 p.m. yesterday evening, as I understand it. The translations were not all present and correct by yesterday evening, and it is impossible to table amendments for certain languages if the report is not available in these languages. Hence I would strongly recommend that we do not continue the discussion here now, but that the Groups consult with each other this afternoon on how they wish to proceed with the report, and that we then reach a decision first thing tomorrow morning. One thing I would stress, however, is that it will not be acceptable in future, to discuss reports here and, if applicable, vote on them, if a) if the reports have only been decided on in committee that same week, and b) the translations are not available either. This does not do justice to the dignity of Parliament and I object to a procedure of this kind.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we seem to be very much in agreement on this score. Saddam Hussein's regime, which we all regard as dictatorial, is being denounced by the Group of the , the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party, the Group of the and the Group of the alike. For the past 23 years, he has systematically killed his own people and the leaders of his Stalinist regime. Moreover, we denounce the US's unilateral action as well. In addition, we have noticed that Europe is still not speaking with one voice to a sufficient degree. We would, in fact, urge the Council to take an active part in this debate in the United States now, because it is clear that there are different currents in the US. What we could do with right now is a display of commitment to the United States that is not anti-America but pro-America by taking part in that debate now. But that requires that we speak with one voice and take a clear stand. I would like to say to the Security Council that this is not, therefore, a licence to launch into unilateral action. We need the UN Security Council if we want to exert pressure on Iraq to reinstate the weapons inspections. This also means that if we ultimately want to act and threaten with violence, we must have proof. This proof must be clear and public. This also means that we must at the same time be prepared to act smartly. Mr Lagendijk of the Group of the used the term 'smart sanctions' which are, of course, a reality. By using them, we can hit Iraq and its leadership harder and help the population at the same time. What Commissioner Patten said here this morning is crucial. It could be very detrimental if we unilaterally adopted the same stance in the Middle East, but we can also use this stance to enlist support for a new peace initiative along with the US. It is essential that the Council take action in order to decide on the two-state solution. Peace in the Middle East now, by addressing the issue of Palestine and Israel, is the key. There is a real downside, of which President Mubarak has warned us, in fact, namely that we may head in the wrong direction. Europe is playing a pivotal role. Instead of neglecting this role, we must take action now. I would ask for your support in this.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur on the magnificent work she has carried out on such a serious problem. The trafficking in women is having a very great impact, especially in the border countries of the European Union, where mafias are forming which deceive women with promises of employment and a better life, and which lead them eventually into prostitution and, in many cases, into situations which can only be described as slavery. This is a phenomenon related to our current society, in which immigration is beginning to cause a serious problem, since we are seeing significant movements of people who are seeking the kind of welfare society which we enjoy in the majority, or practically all, of the European Union countries. This situation requires a series of new measures, most importantly aiding victims and prosecuting the people involved in the trafficking in women and children – since it is not just a problem for women, but children as well – for sexual exploitation. Amongst the measures proposed in this report are basically aid to victims and the request that Member States amend their legislation in a way which will allow quicker and more coordinated action amongst the various countries in order to resolve this very serious problem. The victims do not only require material aid, but also legal assistance – because we are generally talking about people with no documentation, with no options and who are living in fear and need help – which, at the same time, protects their identity and guarantees that they will not suffer even worse problems if they return to their countries of origin. The different countries of the European Union must harmonise their legislation in this respect and implement sufficient measures to help these victims. The trade in sex is increasing at an alarming rate. Women and children are involved. I believe that the media should also aid this process, because we are seeing more and more adverts in the press – sometimes in the very serious newspapers – behind which lies the trafficking in women and exploitation. However, it is not only through legal assistance and through protecting the victims that we must address the problem, but also through information campaigns, mainly in the countries of origin, so that these women know what they are really exposing themselves to, since the majority of them are being deceived and do not realise the hell they are about to walk into.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the reform plans receive my approval. They focus on fleet control and enforcement, with good reason. Making cuts hurts, but it also opens up new opportunities. EU resources must be deployed with a view to promoting viable economic activities. Concerning control and enforcement, I share your view about international uniform control on a level playing field. I have a few critical comments to make. First of all, it is beyond me why the Commission wants to allow EU countries to fish for ‘free’ species in the North Sea without any restrictions. That is just asking for trouble. What is required here is a balance. Secondly, you claim that, in principle, the polluter pays. This is indeed stated in the document and is also correct, but we must, however, not lose touch with the facts or reality. We must not get fishermen to foot the bill for natural phenomena. Next I would like to turn my attention to the multi-annual programme: I have no objections to it, as long as we remember the lessons from the past. I would urge you to use effective assessments and minimise red tape. Finally, these are proposals aimed at striking a balance between market forces and the environment. This is European policy..

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would advise Mrs Banotti to follow the advice once given to me by the Station Master at Crianlarich, when I pointed out to him that the two clocks, one on each platform, showed different times. He replied, 'What good would it be having two clocks if they both told the same time?' (Laughter) ***

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I should like to thank the Commission for proposing a regulation for the shipbuilding industry which may be temporary and segmented but which somehow, once again, helps minimise the effects of protectionism, which exists in various trading blocs around the world and not just in Korea. In Korea it is not even a question of protectionism: it is a massive violation of WTO rules. We should like to believe that the complaint that has been made will have some effect and bring some discipline to this sector. The Commission has revealed, however, that it knows the proposed mechanism is not enough, and that it is only one step, and a step with all the negative baggage that stopgap measures entail, once we get beyond the deficit and crises of the shipbuilding industry, some of which have already been mentioned here, so I shall not repeat them. But while it is true that the Nordic countries support investment and alternative technology, and thus achieve added value and still manage to keep active in the market without great social upheaval, this is not equally true for other European Union regions, such as southern Europe, regions where this sector is the largest employer and supports employment in a number of services and subsidiary industries. It is often the only activity that generates development in these regions, and so the disappearance of this activity would be a social tragedy for certain regions, particularly in my country, in Spain and in Greece. But while we hope that the Commission will implement this regulation at least by 2003, we hope for a lot more for the future and a different attitude towards the sector.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the budget of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport contains three important new features: Firstly, a separate appropriation of EUR 12.6 million is being proposed for the implementation of the elearning initiative. It is justified because IT studies have a key place in the EU’s strategy. A considerable increase in the appropriation for IT teaching would also be wise, as if it is to be financed merely from the Socrates, YOUTH and Culture 2000 programmes this might put the implementation of the fundamental aims of these programmes in jeopardy. We have to remember that information technology is a tool, not an absolute value. The second new feature is connected with sport, which still does not have a legal basis in the Union. Sport is mentioned, however, in the Treaty of Amsterdam, and the conclusions of the Nice Summit stressed its social importance. The Committee on Budgets has approved a proposal for a EUR 5 million appropriation for sports club work to prevent exclusion amongst youth. The third new matter in our Committee’s budget is the EUR 1 million appropriation for establishing a centre for monitoring cultural co-operation. In my opinion, the co-ordination of cultural co-operation could be practised in association with the Council of Europe, which has much experience in the field. Chapter A-30 again caused problems. I am very disappointed with the work of the Committee on Budgets in item A-3042, which concerns the funding of European cultural organisations. We in the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport had done a lot of work in connection with this point. We took the Commission’s report on the funding of organisations into account as well as the recommendations of the Committee on Budgets’ working party. We, above all, tried to assess how money might be used in the best possible way from the point of view of European culture. I cannot accept that the Committee on Budgets has interfered with a proposal that required the expertise of a special committee the way it has. I warmly support the proposal contained in the report drafted by Mr Costa Neves for a legal basis and proper rules to apply to A-30. Parliament cannot act as if it were in a ‘grab as grab can’ type of wrestling contest, in which the most unscrupulous party of all is the victor. IN THE CHAIR: MR PACHECO PEREIRAVice-President

Political group: PSE
Before we vote on this, I should like to announce, Madam President, that to help things run smoothly I am prepared to withdraw my amendments relating to landmines and particularly call attention to low-threshold biological anti-mine work. I should like to negotiate further with the Commission on this, but I will not force the issue now provided that we can continue talking. (Parliament approved the common position) *** Simplified procedure – Procedure without report Amended proposal for a Council regulation concerning action against anti-personnel landmines in third countries other than developing countries (COM(2000) 880 – C5-0053/2001 – 2000/0062(CNS)) on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Security and Defence Policy (Parliament approved the proposal by the Commission) Proposal for a Council directive amending Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC and 66/403/EEC on the marketing of fodder plant seed, cereal seed and seed potatoes (COM(2001) 186 – C5-0163/2001 – 2001/0089(CNS)) on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (Parliament approved the proposal by the Commission) *** Report (A5-0246/2001) by Mrs Randzio-Plath, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the recommendation of the European Central Bank for a Council regulation concerning an amendment to Council Regulation (EC) No 2531/98 of 23 November 1998 concerning the application of minimum reserves by the European Central Bank (ECB/2001/2 – C5-0141/2001 – 2001/0805(CNS)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0215/2001) by Mr Heaton-Harris, on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control, on Special Report No 6/2000 of the European Court of Auditors concerning the granting by the Community of interest subsidies on loans by the European Investment Bank to small and medium-sized enterprises within the framework of its temporary lending facility, accompanied by the Commission’s replies (C5-0023/2001-2001/2015(COS)), and on the Special Report No 3/1999 of the European Court of Auditors concerning the management and control of interest-rate subsidies by the Commission, accompanied by the Commission’s replies (C5-0158/2001-2001/2015(COS)) (Parliament adopted the resolution) *** Report (A5-0237/2001) by Mr Lehne, on behalf of the European Parliament delegation to the Conciliation Committee, on the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee for a European Parliament and Council directive on company law concerning takeover bids – Before the vote

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, President-in-Office of the Council, like many of my fellow Members and like many European citizens, I welcome the proposals – which I support – made by the Commission in the wake of the Prestige disaster and presented again here vigorously by Mrs de Palacio. As we all know, however, they may not be enough. If we want to avoid finding ourselves discussing the effects of another disaster in the near future, certain measures need to be taken without delay, with less lukewarm cooperation from the Council: port controls must be stepped up, crews must be given training, assistance must be provided to vessels in difficulty, and, above all, ‘old tubs’ must be banned and single-hulled vessels rapidly replaced. I stress the need to speed up as fast as technologically possible the introduction of the obligation for oil tankers and other vessels with dangerous cargoes to be double-hulled. If we are actually to make a difference in this area, we need practical measures. I therefore propose that access to certain ports located in sensitive areas should be restricted without delay to double-hulled vessels. These areas should be progressively defined and delimited at European level, with the introduction of similar measures to those currently in force, for instance, in Venice harbour. Moreover, the capacity for demolition of old vessels, which is currently inadequate in northern Europe, in particular, must be enhanced with the provision of incentives. The problems ensuing from this drastic measure will only be temporary and will, in any case, be incomparably less than those which would arise should similar disasters take place in sensitive areas, and I am thinking with horror of certain parts of the Mediterranean. Are the Commission and the Council prepared to subordinate the economic considerations which thus far have been given priority to the demands of environmental protection? The Commission’s response would appear to bode well. I call upon the Council to be equally courageous.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, monopolies are not acceptable, whether state or otherwise, and we must be careful with the single market not to create new private monopolies in the energy sector. I would also like to emphasise that the concept of public service and of the public good must go hand-in-hand with liberalization. I am referring to social and environmental concerns which this Parliament has always supported but which are not yet sufficiently articulated in the energy sector with reference to the single market. It is particularly regrettable that liberalization has gone hand-in-hand with a negative impact on energy saving. This is something that we all pay a great deal of lip service to but we are in practice regressing, we are going backwards on energy-saving. We must meet our Kyoto commitments: we have international treaties and obligations under them and it is time that we took this more seriously. I welcome proposals for network access for renewable energies. Subsidies for traditional forms of energies have been intense and are partly responsible for limited progress on renewables. It would be very regrettable if Japan, for example, were to surpass us in the new technologies which we have developed and researched over many years. This is currently something that we should be concerned about. If we support network access for renewables in Europe, we should not find ourselves in this position. Liberalization should apply to all energy sectors, particularly the nuclear sector where there are huge subsidies from some states. Yet the Commission is not tackling this head on. Perhaps it is afraid. I have discussed this with Commissioner Monti. He is a powerful Commissioner and even he is unwilling to tackle some of the Member States head on in this regard. But it is a level playing field, fair is fair, and the nuclear sectors cannot be subsidised. Finally on the Florence process, we must involve the Parliament and we must have some democratic involvement in this process. We cannot just let it remain outside Parliamentary control although it has been useful in some respects.

Political group: Verts-ALE
For over a decade now, we have been debating the takeover directive, the first version of which, as we know, was unable to get over the last hurdle in this House. I am glad that, thanks to the negotiations involving the Council and our rapporteur Mr Lehne, the adoption of this important text is now, at last, within our reach. The Portuguese-Italian compromise arrived at in the Council and adopted in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market and in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs strikes me as the best possible result in a complex situation. Stipulating the Europe-wide applicability of Articles 9 and 11 whilst allowing the Member States the option of not making them binding on their businesses, although not ideal, is the only compromise possible, to which the alternative would be not having a directive at all, and nobody wants that. A small step in the right direction is always better than marking time on the spot for years. I would argue that there are a few highly strategic areas in which the Member States should be accorded special rights, which they would be entitled to use in the event of takeovers. The report before us indirectly covers the possibility of the Member States availing themselves of the right already referred to, and also solves the specifically Scandinavian problem with securities with multiple voting rights without jeopardising the important level playing field, which guarantees enterprises equal opportunities. (Explanation of vote abbreviated in accordance with Rule 137 (1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, with your permission, I rise for the first time here in connection with the Rules of Procedure. I wish to propose that we include a debate on the impact of the referendum in Ireland as a separate agenda item. In my view, the referendum in Ireland offers this House the unique opportunity to shape democracy and intervene immediately in the current debate, rather than always following after the event. Nice resulted in too little democracy and failed to create a sound basis for enlargement. We need more than this now, and with the help of the Irish people, we can re-open this debate. This is the reason for this motion to amend the agenda: we move that a separate agenda item be included to debate the impact of Nice, our positions as parliamentarians with regard to our own willingness to create more democracy in Europe, and the finality of Europe. Europe's citizens would not understand if we shirked this issue at this time. (Applause)

Political group: PSE