GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the rapporteur, Mr Menrad, had a difficult task and ought to be congratulated on the orderly way in which he has carried it out. Most of the amendments express the anguish of us all over the most difficult problem of the single market – the problem of unemployment. This has a bearing, although this has not been voiced, on the fate of our democracies because, as history has taught us, democracies are not maintained just by the production of wealth; they also presuppose distribution on a large scale to the large majority of the population which, in today’s society, presupposes guaranteeing employment. One of the most interesting recommendations from the proposed amendments is the development of more analytical, comparative, quantitative objectives and parallel statistical data with a view to improving comparative evaluation. However, it should be noted that, in acknowledging that unemployment is not just a quantitative but also a qualitative factor, the quantification of the qualitative aspects of employment must be more extensive in respect of levels of income, working hours and special working conditions. After all, leaving aside for the moment the actual form of employment, this is by no means unfeasible. Qualitative data of this kind are the spirit of our social model and, with this in mind, there should be some means of representing minimum protection and the rate of reduction in the invisible sector. Also, employment growth must be linked to the type of activities which do actually stimulate it, because increasing employment using measures adapted to transitory working models is only a short-term solution and a waste of resources. In this sense, Amendment No 9 in Guideline 7 is on the right track. However, it does not fully accord with Guidelines 1 and 2, which specify vocational training with a view to effective integration into the labour market. The amendment incorporates the term “lasting integration into the labour market”, which is an improvement. The Member States should, however, interpret this to mean that the main part of the programmes should not be based on past activities but on those which aim primarily at achieving a capacity to create. One further remark concerning the services sector. Guideline 13 rightly mentions the development of the services sector and of industry-related services. I believe that a broader approach should have been taken on these issues. Developing the service sector can be effected in two opposing ways. On the one hand, we have the development of services within all sectors of production, including the agricultural sector, of which no mention has been made, thus breaking down the barriers between them and, on the other hand, we have the industrialisation of the service sector. The former creates wealth and so mention should have been made of services in the agricultural sector, whereas the latter, banks and insurance companies for instance, will lead to job losses and therefore other measures will have to be taken.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mrs Paciotti has produced an excellent, very logical report, precise in its observations and balanced in its conclusions. She has taken account both of the requisite protection for individuals against any misuse of their own personal data and of the need to reach an agreement with the United States as quickly as possible so as not to put a brake upon the development of trade. At a time when it seems certain that an information society will be developed on the back of the new technologies, we think it vital immediately to implement the means needed to protect the consumer and the citizen from the abuses inherent in the marketing and innovative techniques that are so greedy for accurate information. In the context of an agreement with the United States, the rapporteur emphasised the extent to which this country lacked any legally binding standard on personal data protection. So American firms may use all the data they wish without the Federal State finding fault with this. We feel that it is particularly dangerous that the Commission should be willing to ratify an agreement that offers so few guarantees for the citizen. The ‘safe harbour’ system proposed by the American authorities offers no protection at all. It is a voluntary standard which American firms would themselves apply internally and then only with regard to Europeans. This text, moreover, does not give citizens the right to go to court if their rights are flouted. It would be a great shame, particularly now that, after years of discussion, the Council appears to be willing to set up a proper European body to monitor the use of personal data, if we were to ease off the pressure in terms of our demands on the subject with regard to third countries in general and the United States in particular. It is a condition sine qua non for any real protection of citizens’ individual liberties. In conclusion, I should like to remind the Commission that personal data protection is an integral part... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I must object in the strongest possible terms to the proposal, within this legislative programme, to reduce the agricultural budget by EUR 300 million for the purpose of rebuilding Kosovo. While I have every sympathy with the need to rebuild Kosovo, and while I understand fully that the CAP accounts for almost half of the entire expenditure of the EU, I nevertheless object to the agricultural budget being regarded as a well from which water can be drawn each time another department develops a thirst. I know a guarantee has been given that the removal of this sum from the budget will not affect any of the financial obligations entered into by the Commission within the framework of the CAP, but I just do not believe it. I do not accept that this will simply be a one-off event. When farmers in my own constituency of Scotland are suffering their worst recession in more than 100 years, how can I explain to them that this EUR 300 million would be better off spent on Kosovo? When farmers are going bankrupt every day in the UK, when the level of suicides amongst farmers and farm-workers has reached unprecedented levels, when the economy of rural Britain is in spiral decline, how can I explain to them that EUR 300 million would be better off spent in Kosovo? In such circumstances, it would be mad to slash the budget to this extent. We should be spending more to alleviate this crisis rather than contemplating spending less. I urge honourable Members, when we come to vote on this issue, to vote against this proposal.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, nearly six months have passed since the question of coexistence last played a leading role in this House. Back then we were discussing the regulation on genetically modified food and feed. I was the rapporteur, and we had to battle with the Commission and certain Member States in order to secure the flexibility in the form of Article 26a. We were successful, and I congratulate Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf, whose own-initiative report on the subject sends another important political signal from this House. I think it is incredibly important that we now call on the Member States to make use of and give shape to that flexibility which we in Parliament fought for on their behalf. However, I also agree with Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf that it will be necessary to establish European regulations on coexistence. I do not understand how the Commission can say it is able to authorise this centrally, and has the competence to do so, when it does not know the answers to the questions raised by coexistence. Another reason that I think Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf’s own-initiative report is incredibly important is that very soon there will be a vote on the Seed Directive under the comitology procedure, which, unfortunately, leaves Parliament out of it. I also think that the section in which we state that the pollution value for seeds is determined by the proximity value is extremely important. We should not reproach ourselves: the threshold value we agreed – 0.9% – is very hard to maintain, even if we do not require absolute seed purity. Consequently I hope that tomorrow this House will be able to send this important political signal.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, I too would like to commend the rapporteur on her report, which is a meticulous and substantive piece of work. The European Union’s structural and cohesion policies are, without doubt, essential tools for creating the right conditions with a view to tackling and reducing the levels of economic and social disparity between the regions. Despite the steps taken thus far, these levels are still very high, and are unacceptably high as regards unemployment. These policy objectives can only be achieved through their careful coordination and organisation on the basis of well thought-out and sensible guidelines. Let us not forget that when these policies are effective, they also benefit European citizens by directly improving their quality of life. Let us not forget either that greater consideration should be given to the islands and remote regions of the European Union because their geographical location is a hindrance to their economic and social development, unless of course the Commission is intending to build bridges or underwater tunnels linking them to the European mainland. In closing, I would like to point out that the structural policies as a whole require greater flexibility so that they can adapt to changing circumstances and thereby respond to the new challenges and opportunities of the new millennium, for which we all hope for the best.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, if one thing singles out European society from the other societies of the world, it is precisely its sensitivity and commitment to the fight for freedom and human rights. However, I would like to say that this fight is not the exclusive property of the left. Sometimes, with cheap demagoguery and a progressivism which it cannot even define, the left tries to confuse the public with hypotheses which sometimes lack any content and are sometimes inadequate for the task of structuring society in accordance with certain values which our Group will always champion. That is what differentiates some benches from others. Article 13 is the starting point for a new EU objective: to combat discrimination or inequality in the treatment of citizens for the reasons listed therein. The action programme seems to me to be a serious programme. It is almost acceptable in its original form because, essentially, it is directed at something fundamental, that is, educating European society in the value of the human being, of whatever type. I believe that this is the central nucleus of the programme. I therefore consider that it is necessary to commit the public and private sectors to this task and, to this end, I believe that the public sector must provide an example. Public administrations and schools must be a model in the fight against discrimination and the same must be required, naturally to an equal extent, of the private sector. Finally, ladies and gentlemen, the media must also play an important role in this task. Unfortunately today, certain sections of the media, such as television and the Internet, do not contribute through their programmes and advertisements to the dignified and respectful treatment of the sectors of society who most need that cooperation, such as, for example, women and children. The objective of also increasing the awareness of the media with regard to this task therefore seems to me to be a very good one.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to congratulate Mr van Velzen on his work. I agree that it would be appropriate to proceed to a new phase in the liberalisation of the electronic communications sector which will mirror market developments and constantly evolving technology. The new legislation should affect all the communications infrastructures and related services by means of recommendations and codes of conduct and other vehicles. If we keep the regulations to a minimum, this will ensure proper coherence between market developments and the reference legislative framework in addition to promoting investment by operators, improving the quality of the services and, therefore, giving the consumer greater benefits. In addition, considering the substantial increase in the number and size of operators and the changing conditions of competition over the market as a whole, the national regulatory authorities should, henceforth, start to use their competences, moving on from an ex ante approach to regulation to an ex post approach. In a scenario where the issuing of licences is genuinely liberalised, no prior approval should be required by the regulators before operators can enter the market unless this is strictly necessary. We agree with the Commission that, in this second phase of opening up of the market, while full competition has not yet been achieved, it would be appropriate for there to be specific legislation governing the activities of telecommunications companies which used to have monopolies and whose economic and financial strength is such as to influence the market. When competition is consolidated and the free telecommunications services market has fully developed its potential in the various sections, it will be possible to reduce the sector rules and the special obligations for the operators dominating the market which I have just referred to. The Commission will have to be careful not to create inequalities between the different national product and service markets. Moreover, in the longer term, a joint public and private action appears essential in order to make it possible for all people to use all the telematic services of a distinct social nature, such as telemedicine, teleworking, electronic public administration services and electronic commerce. These objectives are an integral part of the well-known e-Europe initiative, which is a universal service based on a development philosophy which is social as well as economic.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I do not want to call on the Portuguese Presidency to do anything, because that is not necessary, as they have worked to ensure effective cooperation. However, I would like to encourage you to do certain things in Feira. By way of preparation for the decisions to be taken in December, it should once again be made clear in Feira that the enlargement process needs to be tailored to each individual country, so as to bring those countries which are best prepared into the European Union at an earlier stage. With regard to institutional issues, it should be made clear at the summit that enhanced cooperation cannot be used as an excuse for failing to introduce proper extension of qualified majority voting. As far as we are concerned, the extension of qualified majority voting will be a yardstick for the success of the Nice Summit, and it is linked with Parliament’s involvement through codecision. We need to achieve efficiency and legitimacy, that is very important. Furthermore, we urge you to extend the mandate of the Intergovernmental Conference such that it can be concluded in Nice but also so that certain important areas can be included. An attempt must be made to make the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding. It needs to be made clear that we need a voice in economic and monetary policy and democratic control of economic and monetary policy. Progress should at least be made with streamlining the treaties and demarcating competences. At this point I would particularly like to mention the common foreign and security policy, which follows on from the implementation of the conclusions of the Helsinki and Cologne Summits, and has made good progress under the Portuguese Presidency. We wish to encourage you to prepare the way so that we take the right decisions over the next six months.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, my speech concerns the MacCormick report, which deals with European governance and – as the rapporteur rightly mentioned – Europe united in diversity. The Commission communication on which this debate is based, and to which Commissioner Fischler made a timely reference earlier, proposes tripartite contracts and agreements committing the Community, the States and regional and local authorities. It proposes this in order to make Community rules adaptable to situations that are characterised by significant environmental and demographic diversities as well as to the political diversities of the Union, from transport policy to regional, territorial policies and so on. This is an important decision, although it must be noted that it will start an experimental phase in which we must take stock in order to learn the necessary lessons, which will partially be procedural ones but which – as has already been said – will also concern the best management of Community regional policies. We know that, in any case, these are agreements bound by an obligation of compatibility with the Treaties regulating the life of the European Union and adjustments that must not hinder the functioning of the internal market. Basically, the principle to which the Commission refers in this communication, which is accurately interpreted in the MacCormick report, is that of flexibility. This principle entails respecting the various constitutional systems of the States of the Union, but it recognises that in some States there are constitutional systems that assign huge responsibilities to regional and local authorities, which must not be reduced despite the fact that, in such cases, the need for greater democratic participation must not cause imbalances that would run counter to the guidelines produced by the constituent Convention. Tripartite contracts cannot, however, derogate from the provisions of secondary law applicable throughout the territory of the European Union because – as I mentioned earlier – it is only in this way that they remain coherent with the guidelines of the constituent Convention. We need to improve the implementation of Community policy. It is, therefore, important that the tripartite agreements and contracts define clear objectives based on the need to give due consideration to diversity throughout the territory of the European Union, although, on the basis of these experiences, it will then be possible to look again at a policy for the management of Community policies that goes beyond the issue of diversity and tackles the more general issue of democracy in greater depth without, however, compromising – and I believe that this must be emphasised – the uniform enforcement of Community law across the entire European area.

Political group: PPE-DE
Thank you, Commissioner and I certainly agree with the substance, particularly of the early part of your answer. I welcome the fact that NGOs are funded through the exclusion and anti-discrimination action programmes. But I have one specific question: why are only eight or nine NGOs, as far as my information is concerned, funded through these two lines? Secondly, NGOs feel that they are being unfairly denied access to core funding. My information is that they are being pushed into project funding and 18 environmental NGOs, for instance, are receiving from the Commission funding towards their running costs. It occurs to me that two years after the 1998 budget freeze, it might be time now for the Commission to respond to what are very clear needs from the European-based social NGOs for core funding to cover their running costs.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I share the opinion of Messrs Rocard and Cappato and other fellow Members who think that software as such should not be patentable. Article 52 of the European Patent Convention excludes software as such and states that ideas and theories are not suitable for patents. It must be about technical innovation, and that is precisely the heart of the problem we are all facing. It is also the heart of the directive. The Patent Office recently concluded that all programs that run on a computer are technical by definition. Under the Patent Office’s current practices, it has already awarded more than 30 000 patents, many of which are not actually legally valid. Mr Rocard has rightly mentioned that there is a difference between an invention based on the forces of nature and a product of the human intellect. I am of the opinion that we must therefore support some of the amendments, which have also been submitted to the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy and also the amendments submitted to the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport in the past. These tighten the definition in such a way that, in my view, software as such is excluded. If these amendments are not accepted, I will vote against the directive. There is a good deal of disquiet among small- and medium-sized enterprises and the open source movement. Human knowledge and the dissemination thereof is an important freedom which we in Europe must preserve. This must be done if only on account of human dignity, but not solely for that reason. We will be even more competitive than the United States and the directive will have to rule out the US situation completely. I therefore hope that many of you will vote in accordance with this line so that we will get a directive that is workable.

Political group: ELDR
I warmly welcome the fact that the Portuguese Presidency is making justice and home affairs one of its top priorities or jewels in the crown. I was also encouraged by Commissioner Patten’s comments this morning about a rapid reaction fund for security crises. Perhaps that will end scandals like the failure of states to deploy in Kosovo the police they promised. I just want to highlight three areas among many where we need quick progress. The first is asylum. It is essential to establish a single European system, but one based on fairness, full respect for the Geneva Convention and decent reception conditions, including an end to routine detention. Decisions on asylum should take months – not years. The second area is that of freedom: freedom to move and reside wherever one wishes in the Union; freedom of information; freedom to vote for all who have European citizenship – and that includes not just Member State citizens but third country nationals. Let our citizens know that our common policies in justice and home affairs are about freedom, not just about repression. The last area I want to mention is convergence of civil and criminal justice systems. Eurosceptics claim that this is a threat to sovereignty, the end of the nation-state, and so on. But the case of the suspect wanted for questioning in connection with the murders of three women in France, including British student, Isabel Peake, who was thrown off a train, shows why we need mutual recognition. Arrested and released in Madrid, he is now being extradited after arrest in Lisbon. Whatever the Eurosceptics say, it is in all our interests to get cooperation in such matters. Finally, as has already been said, it is essential, and I hope that the IGC will cover this, to move to codecision with the European Parliament in these areas, with democratic and judicial scrutiny.

Political group: ELDR