GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Surely the title of the report under discussion – safe and sustainable pensions – is meant euphemistically, given that it is obvious both from the spirit and the letter of the report that its concern is for companies and employers and to radically dismantle social security and pensions in a way best in keeping with interests of big business. Using the 'challenges posed by the ageing of the population', which extends the period of retirement and has an adverse effect on business activity, as a pretext, it promotes the gradual implementation of the Stockholm decisions on drastic intervention in social security systems: part-time employment, the abolition of early retirement, benefits indexed to contributions, harsh cuts in benefits, a longer working life and an increase in the retirement age or the number of years' contributions required before full retirement, the gradual dismantling of the welfare state and the promotion of alternative private care and welfare systems. This endless list of harsh, anti-grass roots measures which may fail to persuade us about ‘safe and sustainable pensions’ is a knee-jerk reaction to the other part of the report, which is the 'future evolution of social protection from a long-term point of view'. Fleecing the workforce, insecurity, expensive private care, commercialising the pension system, poverty and social exclusion. That is what is in store for the workers, while big business, which demands that the social security system be sacrificed in order to safeguard its competitiveness, can look forward to a more robust, completely unaccountable and hugely profitable future. The break up of the social security system, in conjunction with working time arrangements geared to employers' interests, that is, part-time work and ‘flexible’ working times, are the terrifying reality of what was so cynically referred to in Stockholm as 'the need to reduce bottlenecks in the labour market', that is, the creation of a huge army of employable people with no rights and no demands who must dance to the tune of big business with its speculative, competitive interests. The reaction of Greek workers and the Greek people as a whole to the abolition of the welfare state, the mass, combative rallies and strikes taking place, even as we speak, are a most resonant and categorical response to leaders laying disgusting plans without any thought for the people affected. The Greek workers have said the first resounding and steadfast 'no' to the poverty and insecurity in store for them. We are positive that all the workers of Europe will say the same and we shall be at their side. You are sowing an anti-grass roots storm and you will reap a grass-roots hurricane. However, you can be sure that what you are trying to do will not wash! - Buitenweg report (A5-0166/2001)

Political group: GUE-NGL
The Danish Social Democrats have today voted against Mr Dimitrakopoulos’s and Mr Leinen’s report. The enlargement of the EU is an historic opportunity to create a peaceful, stable and cooperative Europe. At the same time, it is the EU’s greatest challenge to date. A change to the Treaties is a prerequisite for preparing the EU to admit the new Eastern and Central European countries. It is now 10 years since the Berlin Wall came down. We agree to the timetable which has been proposed so that the Intergovernmental Conference might be concluded by the end of the year 2000. It must not be formalities such as changing the Treaties which postpone admission of the new countries. That is why we must also be careful not to place obstacles or stumbling blocks in the way of the Intergovernmental Conference's ending on time and of its results being approved in the individual countries in accordance with the regulations in the respective countries’ constitutions. Mr Dimitrakopoulos’s and Mr Leinen’s report paves the way for a very thorough overhaul which we do not think it will be possible to implement within the established time frame. We have therefore voted against it. The many amendments and the many different opinions which have been expressed in connection with the vote today illustrate as clearly as one could wish the problems which a very comprehensive agenda would entail. As members of the Group of the , we have voted, together with our fellow party members, for and against a range of amendments. We have done so because we want European development to move in a characteristically social democratic direction. This does not however alter our general view of the report. There are however a number of points which we must clearly reject, including initiatives which remove the basic principle that it is the Member States which, in accordance with their respective constitutions, should enter into and amend the Treaty concerned. We must also clearly repudiate the idea of the EU’s being made into a defensive alliance. This is not a task for the EU but for NATO.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, like the previous speaker, we must congratulate not only Mrs Lambert, the rapporteur, for the work she has carried out, but also, Commissioner, your staff for their work and for the coordination which has developed between the Parliamentary committee and the Commission which has led to the streamlining and updating of a text that concerns one of the fundamental aspects of this European Union of ours, which is the freedom of movement – as you yourself said – not only of workers, but of all Europe’s citizens. This text has been streamlined and updated and takes account of the rulings of the Court of Justice, but also of the current realities of employment and of certain types of self-employed workers. In my opinion, we must welcome the text and call for this work to be concluded before the end of the year, before enlargement takes place, because this will make progress easier to achieve. In the little speaking time left to me, I should like to focus on one issue: the situation of frontier workers. These are truly Europeans par excellence; it is they who suffer as a result of differences in legislation and who least understand the steps forward Europe is taking, and yet they are the ones for whom everything possible should be done, to enable them to perform their jobs across borders. As has already been said, the progress that has been made is clear to see. I wish, however, to emphasise the need to research new forms of working together, new forms of institutional cooperation between Member States, when problems in implementing these regulations persist, particularly in cases where there are differences in their implementation. There are many such differences and there are also many delays in harmonising these. With regard to this fundamental issue, proposals have been tabled in Amendments Nos 51 and 52, on which we will vote tomorrow. I believe that this issue of coordination will require ongoing effort and fine-tuning. Today, coordination is necessary in that responsibility in these fields falls to the Member States. This does not mean, however, that we should not raise the necessary issue of harmonisation in order to protect the European social model.

Political group: PSE
May I wholeheartedly congratulate my Labour colleague Mr Miller on his report improving accessibility in vehicles with more than eight seats. I fully support measures to improve accessibility for people of reduced mobility to urban buses with the introduction of ramps or lifts and low floor buses. This will transform the lives of older people, people with disabilities and parents with children living in towns across the North-West who will now be able to use local buses as easily as everybody else. Moreover, it is not just elderly people, people with disabilities – including blind people – and parents with children who will benefit. We are seeking to broaden the definition of 'people with reduced mobility' to include everyone who has difficulty when using public transport, such as those with heavy luggage, pregnant women and people with shopping trolleys and shopping bags. We have all experienced getting on the bus laden with shopping bags from the local supermarket, and I for one certainly hope my bus ride home will be made easier and less stressful. These are simply common-sense measures that will make life so much easier for people across Europe, particularly in Britain where buses are an essential way of getting around our towns and cities. The bus and coach directive will secure minimum safety standards for the design of buses operating in Europe and basic requirements to ensure access for people with reduced mobility, such as the continued manufacture of existing low-floor buses and better facilities for passengers with mobility difficulties, especially wheelchair users and parents with pushchairs. I give the green light to these measures and look forward to a more pleasant bus ride home from Bolton town centre after a Saturday afternoon's shopping spree.

Political group: PSE
The EC Treaty specifies that the European System of Central Banks shall have price stability as its principal objective. So far, however, there has been no single instrument to record, transmit and evaluate labour costs, which constitute the most significant factor in price stability. The Common Position that is before us will close this gap. It is with satisfaction that I note that the rapporteur has given his approval to the Council draft, without tabling any new amendments. Also to be welcomed is the idea, put forward in the Critical Appraisal, of developing a productivity index enabling increases in labour costs to be measured in relation to growth in productivity. Our esteemed colleague could not, however, restrain himself from pointing out in his Critical Appraisal that he does not share the Commission’s, and the Council's, viewpoint that labour costs are one of the largest sources of inflation. I regret that I am unable to share the rapporteur's viewpoint. If you want to understand the potential influence of total salary on changing prices, it is enough to consider the proportion of salary costs to the overall costs of any business, be it large or small. The argument adduced by the rapporteur to the effect that salary increases are only the result of increases in the cost of living, is like the question of whether it was the chicken or the egg that came first. (Explanation of vote abbreviated in accordance with Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PPE-DE
We Swedish Social Democrats believe that it is vital that minors be protected from television advertising aimed at children , as this group is particularly susceptible and may have difficulty differentiating advertising from other programming. In Sweden, TV advertising aimed at children under 12 is totally forbidden under the Swedish Radio and Television Act. According to Directive 97/36/EC, advertising must be clearly identifiable as such. Children under a certain age cannot appreciate the difference between advertising aimed at children and normal children’s programmes. Slightly older children can appreciate the differences but not understand the purpose of the advertising. (Research report by Gunilla Jarlbro of Gothenburg University). We therefore believe that this must not be promoted, which is why we are voting against this part (paragraph 1 aa) of the report.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the public monopoly for postal services was introduced in the nineteenth century for a very good reason. The governments which brought this about were not Socialist, but Conservative or Liberal. They only made this decision after it transpired that private companies were unable to guarantee a swift, regular, steady, affordable and universally deployable service. The radical reform which the Commission proposed at the beginning of this year is threatening to turn the clock back by two hundred years. Why should we impose that model which is now being tested in the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland on the entire European Union as a permanent measure? Apparently, the proposal is founded on an ideological principle, namely that companies should no longer be publicly owned. If this is the case, then not only banks, chemical companies and steel companies must be privatised, but also public utility companies such as the energy supply, public transport and the postal services. On the one hand, the proposal aims to create a great deal more space for competing private companies, without waiting for the promised evaluation of the effects previous liberalisation decisions have had. On the other hand, the proposal would mean that the position of a group of interested companies which benefit from the wholesale liberalisation of the postal company would be strengthened from 2007 onwards. The proposed liberalisation has sweeping implications for the services in rural areas, for employees of postal companies and for private users of the post. It ultimately means that there will be fewer post offices, the service will slow down and the post office will no longer be able to provide the social services functions. Nor let us not overlook the higher rates due to the fact that different service companies will operate alongside each other. This translates into longer hours and less job security for the staff. It is unlikely that the planned protection of the universal provision of services by means of a compensatory fund, as a result of which private profits are ploughed back into public services, will last. Fledgling companies could in future cite this restriction in their freedom as grounds for filing a complaint on account of improper government intrusion and distortion of competition. This is why it is positive that a majority of this House now refuses to take matters as far as Commissioner Bolkestein proposed at the beginning of this year. This has my support, but it would also be preferable if mail between 150 and 350 grammes remained in the hands of the existing postal companies.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, at the present time the United Kingdom has rates of fuel duty which are spectacularly higher than in other parts of the European Union. One of the effects of this is particularly detrimental to the peripheral parts of the country. It has a disproportionately distorting effect on competition, affecting local firms in the periphery competing against large multinationals in the UK. That is an important caveat to put down about ways in which fuel taxes can distort local economies. I do not think there is a good environmental argument for trying to drive most of the population of the United Kingdom into the bottom south-east corner. I did not enter politics to repeat the Highland clearances. That said, it is also clearly absurd to exempt aviation from the duty to diminish greenhouse gases and ozone depletion and it is also a good thing to look towards an equality of taxation across the European Union, as Mrs Lucas has done, rather than grossly distorting differentials between different parts. I have considerable reservations about how this will work in practice, but we should welcome the principle that Mrs Lucas has put forward.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, thank you for this innovation which is most welcome. I congratulate the Danish presidency very warmly and naturally I congratulate my colleague, Mr Haarder, a former good member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy as well as of this group, on his current tasks. However, friends in the presidency, I have a request for you which, as the Danish presidency, I believe you will wish to grant. Today in the Treaty of Rome we give rights – human rights and animal rights – but we give no rights to children. Yet the fall of the Berlin Wall and the ending of the Cold War threw open a devastating picture of child abuse, child neglect, child misery and child hunger and despair such as we have not seen in Europe since the Second World War. Today, with the enlargement of the European Union, the situation has not got better. Why do I say that? Because there is ample evidence, alas, that the breaking down of borders, that the enlargement of the European Union, factors such as globalisation, the Internet and Schengen Agreements have made the tragedy of child abuse still worse. Children today are at risk as they have not been before; they are trafficked around the globe in vast numbers. Traffickers, organised criminals and separation from their parents – these are among the many things of which children are victims. The European Union cannot do everything, but we are uniquely powerful. What I ask is that you work with me and with the Children's Alliance, a group of us across the floor of this House, belonging to every single group, so that we can secure unanimous support. We seek to put into the Accession Treaty and into the Treaty of Rome something so simple, just a commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which every single Member State has signed and ratified. The most important convention in the history of the world, it has the most ratifications. Only the USA now stands out against it. The Commission has played its part. It is in the acquis communautaire. It should now be in the Accession Treaty and in the Treaty of Rome. President—in-Office, will you work with me on this?

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, although I am sure that I, together with the sessional services for my group, prepared the voting list correctly, questions have been asked about it. I would therefore like to ask you to clarify again for all Members that we will vote on the report, as Mrs Theato said in relation to the corrected versions for various languages. It should once again be stressed that we are to vote on the texts of the report.

Political group: PSE
In view of the specific characteristics of the outermost regions in the fisheries sector (the non-industrial nature of their fleet, the smallness of their markets, the small size of their companies and the delay in the modernisation and restructuring of the fleet), the regulation under examination will, by derogating from rules recently adopted for the EU as a whole, exceptionally allow the granting of financial aid in the outermost regions for the modernisation and renovation of the local fishing fleets. This derogation is fundamental for the outermost regions, and it will be even more valuable if the Council accepts the following proposals from Parliament: - public aid for fleet renovation should be available until the end of 2006 instead of December 2004; - an evaluation of these measures should be produced so that it can be examined whether they should continue after 2006; - advances against the aid should be allowed to reach 14% instead of the current 7%. Report: van den Berg (A5-0402/2003)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, and those fellow Members who are still awake, I would like to thank Mr Jarzembowski and Mr Swoboda for their lucid reports, with reference to which we can at last try to revive the railways by opening them up to competition. It is fashionable these days to talk about the railways; it is politically correct. It often feels as if Parliament is a chamber where there is just one permitted truth. We all dash along in the same direction, like a flock of sheep, trying to convince one another that the railways will solve Europe’s transport problems. It is hard for us politicians to admit the facts. I have nothing at all against the railways; on the contrary, I greatly enjoy sitting in the buffet car, having a beer and admiring the landscape as it flits past. To be able to make reasonable decisions we have to identify the real importance of the railways for the economy and examine just how big a part the various modes of transport play. By far the biggest is road transport. The share of rail transport, measured in tons per kilometre, has fallen to below 15%, but even this way of measuring the figures gives too rosy a picture of the situation. From the economic point of view, transporting fifty computers a thousand kilometres is quite a different matter from transporting a hundred tons of grit ten kilometres, although the tonnage per kilometre is the same in both cases. It is also quite a different matter to transport raw textiles weighing tons as compared to an enormous load of silk neckties – I had one for myself, by the way. For this reason, any comparison must be made on the basis of the value of the consignments, and, if it is calculated this way, the share the railways have is just – surprise, surprise – 3%. I am not mathematically gifted, but I see a dramatic difference in favour of road transport, whose share is more than 95%. It is like comparing a fly with an ox, but it is not any wonder, because it is impossible to ignore the ease of transport, flexibility and door-to-door delivery service we associate with transportation by road. At present the real role of the railways in Europe’s economy is, unfortunately, marginal, although they receive a good deal of assistance from the taxpayer. But it is just because of this that we have to do all we can to revive rail transportation and support its gradual opening up to competition. We expect a constructive contribution from France when we set the clocks of European railway stations to the new millennium.

Political group: PPE-DE
We are voting against Amendment No 6 but for Mrs Haug’s report as a whole because we think that the way in which the EU’s own resources are constructed ought to be reformed. We agree that we ought to have a more direct link between the European Union and its citizens when it comes to financing the EU’s budget and that we ought to be increasing the Union’s economic independence step by step. In view of the lack of confidence in the European Union, as evidenced by, among other things, the low turnout at the election, and in view of the importance of preserving the EU’s character as a union both of citizens and of Member States, we consider that it would be wrong to aim now for a financially autonomous EU or one which is totally independent of contributions from the Member States. Nor do we consider that the financing of the EU should lead to an increased burden for tax payers.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I come from Leipzig, from East Germany that is. I have seen often enough how right-wing extremists have harassed – or attempted to harass – foreigners, or even those who hold different beliefs. But I have also seen the other side, and how courageous men and women have defended themselves. It is wrong to picture East Germany as being predominantly right-wing extremist in its leanings. The vast majority of people are open-minded and tolerant, and an ever-increasing number of them are prepared to nail their colours to the mast. I believe it is also wrong to maintain that the young people are right-wing extremists. The issue is more complex than that, for although, Mrs Schroedter, it may be precisely these young people that grab the headlines, they do live with their parents and exist within a social sphere. In other words, if we want to solve this problem then we must do more to educate them politically and to communicate values to them, and more still to encourage them to stand up for their beliefs. Over the past few weeks, the German Government has made an additional DM 70 million available for just such projects. I feel that is a very important sign. Likewise, for me personally, the fact that consideration is being given to banning the NPD (National Democratic Party of Germany) sends out a very important social signal. We Germans will not submit to being terrorised by a minority. It is our democracy that is being put to the test here. Speaking as a European, I beseech you not to write East Germany off as a region. I myself, together with many other people throughout Germany, condemn right-wing extremism and xenophobia, and we need the support of the rest of Europe in our fight against it.

Political group: PSE