GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, first of all I would like to thank the honourable Members from the various groups for supplying the 32 signatures which allowed me to submit a number of amendments in Parliament. I am absolutely convinced that we must endeavour, on a couple of points, to revert back to Parliament’s opinion from the first reading, which we adopted exactly two years ago by a very large majority. It is mainly to do with tightening up on private copying, establishing clear regulations for the on-line storage of data so that the responsibility of Internet providers is better defined in line with the e-commerce directive, and the possibility of Member States being able to introduce technological protection measures without disrupting the internal market. Why am I defending this opinion? First and foremost for reasons of principle. Is there anything more important than protecting private property? Is there anything more personal than the product of human talent, the creation of something which rejuvenates. The European Parliament has always been the guardian of Europe’s cultural heritage and that is how it must stay, also in the digital age. If we do not put a brake on indiscriminate copying, there will soon be nothing left to copy. After all, if we fail to provide protection, people will lose the incentive to be creative and produce new works of art. But there is more to this debate than principles. Copying will also cost jobs. According to current estimates, one hundred thousand jobs have been lost in the European Union owing to the copying of CDs. The State loses out on income too. Apparently, the State of Belgium alone, which I know very well, misses out on one billion Belgian Francs in VAT as a result of this practice, and the same goes for all government coffers. We must be in no doubt about what it is we are risking. I would like to echo Mr Rothley’s sentiments. So all in all, I think there is good reason to support the amendments which I tabled, together with many of my fellow delegates, for which I would like to thank you in advance.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, in a context marked by the rail accidents in Great Britain which serve to illustrate the price paid by society to quench the thirst for profit of rail companies, the European institutions are thinking of authorising Member States to grant aid to improve their infrastructures. The European Union, which is ostensibly opposed to national state aid capable of distorting competition, is preparing, in the proposed report, to renege on its own proposals so as to be able to continue its policy of privatising public services. As a result, rail companies, which pocket the receipts from the lines conceded to them without bothering to lay out the minimum expenditure to maintain and renew tracks and other rail equipment, have not only been given absolution but will be entitled to additional subsidies to meet investment obligations which should be their responsibility. We restate our opposition to the privatisation of public services as well as to the introduction of any idea of profitability for services which are crucial to the entire population. Management according to the law of private profit is just as catastrophic for the economy as a whole as it is for the rail industry.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I want to thank Mrs Stauner, my colleague and good friend, for her report. Sometimes we seem to forget that we are dealing with the discharge in respect of 1998. I have carefully read the Court of Auditors' report on the accounts for that year, particularly in relation to agriculture and the Structural Funds. I have come to the conclusion, having had a lot of experience in Parliament and with European affairs, that things have been steadily improving and that 1998 was one of the best performances we had. The difficulties which occurred – a 4% possible error in the area of agriculture and a little more in the area of Structural Funds – did not result from the failure of the European Commission to dispense those funds in an efficient way, but from a failure – and it was a small failure – to control the Member States and the European governments and to ensure that the Member States and their administrations had done the job in the way it should have been done. That is my first point. The second point is in relation to Fléchard. I do not think it is reasonable to inform the people of Europe that there was a loss of EUR 14 million to the European budget arising out of this case. To say this is to use a sort of accountancy jargon that puts the whole issue beyond the understanding of the ordinary European citizen. The truth is that in the Fléchard case, Fléchard was suspected of fraud, the Irish government fined and punished them to the extent of EUR 17 million. Fléchard took the Irish government to court and won an injunction preventing the Irish government from taking the EUR 17 million. The European Commission intervened at that point and proposed a settlement. The worst thing you can say about that settlement is that it was made on a legal basis which was not in effect when the crime was committed, but was in effect while the case was still open. It seems to me that equating that with a loss of EUR 14 million is a gross exaggeration. Finally, the lesson to be learned from this is that in the future we in Parliament have to cooperate with the European Commission to ensure that national governments do not, as in the past, interfere in their responsibilities, and that when the Commission takes national governments to task, it can rely on our support.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, could I ask the Commissioner whether he considers that this evaluation risks putting structures in place which actually endanger the possibility of us of being able to react in a crisis as quickly and as effectively as he suggests we should? secondly, Commissioner, let us take for instance a case study such as Sierra Leone: You talked about the clear distinction between humanitarian aid and long-term assistance. Could you give me your analysis of what stage one part of your work will take over from the other in the case of Sierra Leone?

Political group: PSE
Madam President, if the House permits, I should like to give an oral explanation of my Amendment No 51. Some linguistic confusion has arisen, and what I sought to achieve is not reflected at all in this wording. Instead of what is suggested by the words 'of producers and artists, especially from the non profit-making sector', my primary intention was that we should include in this circle representatives of content providers. Yesterday, before and after the debate, I discussed the matter with some individual Members of the House. Several Members consider that these representatives of the content providers are subsumed under other categories of representatives. This shows that the wording is not clear and unequivocal. The programme is called eContent. We should therefore include content providers in it. This ought not to pose a great problem, in my view. I should appreciate your support for this amendment. (Parliament gave its assent to the oral amendment being tabled) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) * * * Joint proposal for a resolution(3) on the results of the European Council meeting of 7-10 December 2000 in Nice

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am pleased to see the convergence of viewpoints there is between Parliament, particularly the Committee on Budgets, and the Commission, and we can assure you that, for our part, we shall always be there to assist the Commission in the performance of its duties. I do, however, have one small concern, when I hear the Commissioner on the subject of the commitments made by their services in the Committee on Budgets. There was a clear agreement, good or bad I will not say, but there was a contract. There was a clear understanding between the Commission services and the Committee on Budgets that there was agreement on Amendments 4 and 7, i.e. on the idea of linking the mobilisation, the implementation, of the second tranche of macrofinancial aid to the condition that donors should first have fulfilled their relative obligations in terms of payment. But, if I understand what Mr Solbes Mira says correctly, then this undertaking was only a tentative one. Commissioner, an agreement is an agreement. Can you confirm the agreement made by your services in the Committee on Budgets, yes or no? Or are you going to drop this proviso, thus breaking the undertaking made to us?

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I would like to make a comment regarding page 7 of the Minutes. Yesterday you were kind enough to give me the floor and I spoke of the anniversary of the beginning of the peace process in my country, the Basque country. In your kind response, you said: (FR) “Mr Knörr Borràs, I have noted your intervention whose rightful place is in the context of the debate we have organised on this matter.” We have not organised a debate on this matter. It was probably an error in translation but anyway, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to say what I had to say concerning the peace process in the Basque Country.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, on a point of order, in case some of you are too polite to mention it, you may be aware that there is a very nasty smell around the building. I just want to reassure you that the College of Quaestors is taking care of it. It is believed that something rather nasty may have died in the works – a large rat or even a small mouse – but we hope that by this afternoon it will have been cleared up.

Political group: PPE-DE
We voted against the Dimitrakopoulos report because it completes the procedures for the promotion of the central idea of the Rules of Procedure for the European parties and their financing, in other words the creation of agencies and mechanisms which will ‘create a European conscience’ and cultivate the perception of the one-way, capitalist, anti-grass roots policy. Any opposition voiced will be denied any room for expression. Measures are being taken to muzzle the opponents of the system. Rights are being abolished, such as the right of free expression and to establish political parties. On the basis of Community orders and the choices of big business, the European Parliament is being turned into the judge of the ‘political correctness’ of these parties. The majorities will decide on the legality of the existence of the minorities or at least on the terms on which their ideas are projected and on whether or not resources should be granted for such projection. The amendments proposed by Mr Dimitrakopoulos move in a more conservative direction. While excessive powers are granted to the more easily controlled Bureau of the European Parliament, the sole right reserved for the European Parliament itself is to decide ‘by a majority of the votes cast’ (not even an absolute majority of its members) if a party does or does not observe the principles of the EU; in other words, if it fits into the mould of big business in the ΕU and its system. We shall vote against this report because it turns the European Parliament from a forum for the juxtaposition of ideas into the judge of the right of ideas to exist.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, two important assessments of government policies on narcotic drugs form the basis of my criticism of this report. Attempts by governments to suppress the use of certain drugs are as old as their failure. Against this, let me put to you the liberal idea, which certainly does not represent a particularly strong attack on the power of the state, that there are things which are simply no concern of government, such as the flavour of jam people like to eat, how many layers of clothing they wear in winter or which narcotic substance they like to smoke, sniff, drink or inject. Government efforts to regulate individual consumption, indeed, have serious consequences, for it is a fact that the 2 000 heroin users who die a wretched death each year in Germany alone are not destroyed by the drug itself but by the conditions in which the state compels them to use it. The report before us today scarcely touches on this point. A policy on narcotic drugs needs to be a humanist policy, which means for example that drugs should be assessed on the basis of their actual effects on the human body; in other words, impact should take precedence over legality. In practice, however, government policies on narcotic drugs have nothing to do with humanism but much to do with the creation of a governed nation and with the productivity of the national population. Any humanist – and let me say to my radical and less radical fellow Members that I have absolutely no intention of triggering a Marxist critique of the role of the state in this case – will agree that it is essential to reject any type of official policy on drugs.

Political group: GUE-NGL
May I congratulate Mrs Ahern on so enthusiastically taking up the work which Mrs Bloch von Blottnitz began. Energy efficiency is one of the few obvious contributions towards the attainment of the targets set for the EU in Kyoto. By saving energy, we produce fewer CO2 emissions and other pollutants. We also make our businesses more competitive. We can create thousands of much needed jobs and we can allow gas and electricity suppliers to make their money in a more sensible way by selling the services which energy gives us – warm homes, cool fridges and machines which work – rather than selling increasingly large amounts of gas and electricity. The main area in which work is needed is actually that of domestic householders. They use more energy than industry and they use it in a profligate way. That is why many of the measures in SAVE II are aimed at households – better design of houses, more economical household appliances and effective education programmes. Unlike Mr van Velzen, I support very strongly the rapporteur’s amendment raising the percentage of savings to 1.5% above what would happen anyway. We only have to look at the progress in some Member States, including the Netherlands, to see that this is a perfectly attainable percentage. I am convinced that the use of regional and local networks like Federene, Energie Cities and Islenet is one of the most effective ways in which to bring about change, and I hope they will be specifically encouraged in SAVE II as they were in SAVE I. It is important, of course, that we monitor SAVE II and that its achievements are quantified. Our committee will shortly be putting in place a mechanism to ensure that we monitor all spending programmes very closely. SAVE II could be an example of how funding can be used in other EU programmes such as structural funds and funding for third countries. The budget again is inadequate. This programme is not enough on its own either. I hope, Commissioner, that you will persevere with the philosophy behind the rational planning directive. I am pleased that you have done so so far, and we look forward to your next communications on energy efficiency. It is very good to start the work of this new Parliament with programmes which can make a difference, both to the environment and, of course, to the competitiveness needs of our Member States. Like ALTENER, SAVE II is one of those programmes.

Political group: PSE
In reacting to the attacks of 11 September 2001, the European Union showed its solidarity with the United States’ goal of preventing and fighting terrorism. No matter how noble the goals may be, however, the ends cannot justify the means. The USA has been adopting a large number of measures to strengthen border controls, such as the requirement for airlines to transfer Passenger Name Record (PNR) data. In March this year, the European Parliament considered it unacceptable for such data to be transmitted if there were no assurance of an adequate level of protection and compliance with existing Community rules. The Commission’s conclusions indicate that it is not possible to consider the data protection provided to be adequate (the objective that would justify obtaining and storing data remains unclear; the amount of data seems excessive and disproportionate; the period for which data are kept is excessive; no obligations have been accepted by the USA; and there is no means for appeal either by passengers or by the EU itself). It is therefore essential that any transmission of data in contravention of Community rules should be stopped. We have to determine which data may be transmitted and ensure that there is no discriminatory treatment and no retention of data beyond a passenger’s stay. Passengers must be fully informed in advance and must always have access to a swift and efficient appeals system.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Lobsang Dhondup, a Tibetan, was executed three days ago, despite all the appeals made by world public opinion and the human rights organisations, and the approaches of ambassadors of EU Member States notwithstanding. Nor did our debate in this House, and the resolution we adopted unanimously on 19 December 2002, have any effect. On 26 January 2003, the People's Court in Chengdu confirmed the death sentences that had been passed on Lobsang Dhondup and on the Buddhist lama Tenzin Delek. They were accused of involvement in an attack using explosives and of sabotaging national unity. Lengthy solitary confinement without contact with family or legal representatives is a manifest breach of the UN's minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners. Their trial was neither fair nor in accordance with the rule of law. A public hearing in open court – demanded by this Parliament among others – was refused on the flimsy grounds that state secrets were involved. There was no free choice of legal representation, and public defence counsel were appointed by the court. Lobsang Dhondup's execution resulted in immediate protests by the EU Member States. It will also be on the agenda of the human rights conversations between Germany and China. Great Britain has reiterated the demand for the death penalty in China to be at last abolished, and the human rights dialogue between the EU and China must now at last concern itself with this serious case. It is a disaster; while China is trying to cut a credible figure on the world stage, the most basic conditions of the defence of human rights are being disregarded. On behalf of the Group of the , and as President of this Parliament's Intergroup on Tibet, I call upon the Council, the Commission and the Member States to intervene without delay and prevent the death sentence with which Tenzin Delek has been threatened from being carried out. For decades, this lama has worked in the religious, cultural and social fields – with such manifest success that all hardliners see him as a threat. This appalling event can leave us in no doubt that China's violations of fundamental rights should be on the agenda of the Human Rights Convention in Geneva, and the European Union must take the lead in this. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, contrary to what Mr Berthu says, I think that the European Central Bank can pride itself on presenting a more than satisfactory statement. The euro is a success: more than 50 countries already have an exchange rate regime for which the euro serves, at least in part, as a point of reference. Our single currency has become the dollar’s equal. When the value of the euro fell in relation to the dollar, some commentators questioned the so-called lack of structural reforms in Europe. Logic dictates that the current rise in the value of the euro against the dollar should be the result of a successful EU structural policy, unless the changes in the exchange rate between the dollar and the euro are not so much due to economic foundations than to the changing mood of the financial markets. After the irrational exuberance on the stock markets and since the bubble of so-called new economy burst, disillusionment is the order of the day. Virtual stock market gains have transformed into real losses. The debt incurred by companies and private individuals is the cause of particular concern. Added to this is the realisation that many champions of the new economy are turning out to be manipulative conmen. During the financial crisis in Asia, many commentators condemned ‘crony capitalism’, capitalism marked by the complicity within these countries. Yet, current events in the United States, and in Europe too, show us that those who preached in Wall Street, the City and elsewhere were comfortably ensconced in a sort of self-service set-up where company directors, business bankers, analysts and auditing firms gave one another a helping hand when needed. In fact, the world of finance is currently experiencing a sort of uncontrollable collapse which is reminiscent of the crisis of 1929 and subsequent years. Wide-ranging reforms of international finance are therefore essential. The central banks, the EDF and the ECB in particular, must put forward proposals to improve the regulation and supervision of financial markets, including hedge funds. Article 110(1) of the Treaty grants the European system of central banks the right to issue recommendations and opinions. I hope and pray for recommendations from the ECB to combat crony capitalism, to introduce better regulation and supervision, in short, to create the conditions to enable us to regain the general public’s confidence in an ethical financial sector. It is not the danger of inflation that is currently threatening us, but the danger of the financial markets imploding. The ECB cannot shirk its responsibility. In addition, the ECB’s appeals for wage moderation would be much more credible if Mr Duisenberg applied the same language of moderation to investors with capital. (Applause from the left)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, you have spoken of the lengthy payment procedures which have an adverse effect on the image of the European Union in the various actions it takes. We are currently in the middle of a conciliation procedure for the late payment directive, in other words, this is not just a problem in external relations; it is also a problem within Europe. I think that it would make sense if you as Commissioner supported the view that the late payment directive should also apply to the European institutions, because then payment could be made, if there was a legal basis, within a certain period of time, namely between 21 and 30 days or, we hope, even sooner. The idea is that the late payment directive could also be applied in these areas.

Political group: PPE-DE