GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Although my party, the Dutch Party, has always supported the ambition to achieve a Members’ Statute, we asked the Dutch Government as long ago as at the end of 2002, ultimately as part of this statute, to reject in the Council the excessive monthly salary of EUR 8 600 for MEPs, as determined by Parliament. Such a salary attracts the wrong people for the role of MEP. An increase is totally indefensible at a time when many people are laid off and social security is being halted. I am surprised at the eagerness with which Social Democrats and are tabling amendments aimed at getting the Member States to accept the Members’ Statute at this stage, without indicating that the salaries mentioned in the statute are excessive. Similarly, I certainly do not support the use of Parliament’s funds to secure funding for European political groups – the object being to sidestep the Commission's objections. For the time being, the EU still has a surplus of funding available if we put an end to the incidents of major underspending, the useless prestige project Galileo that has been overtaken by the competition, the waste of agricultural subsidies to large companies, the military plans and the costly frauds. This does not justify politicians seizing the right to spend this surplus on themselves.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The partnership between the EU and the southern Mediterranean States comprises a range of positive elements. It should be further developed and deepened. However, the report on the reform of the MEDA programme does not set the right tone on a number of counts. The European Union is fixated with the idea of concluding free trade agreements with the southern Mediterranean countries, although, paradoxically, they only have a one-sided liberalising effect. Such agreements have a particularly negative impact on the financially disadvantaged, as existing free trade agreements have shown. The report concedes that free trade agreements carry this risk. Why else would it describe, and call for, support measures, with a view to alleviating the negative impact of free trade? If the risks attending the free trade strategy are acknowledged, but it is pursued nevertheless, then the social, environmental and cultural components of the programme will only ever have repair and damage limitation status, when they ought to be the guiding principle for such agreements. Furthermore, in order to qualify for subsidies, the MEDA countries must satisfy the Bretton Woods institutions (for example the IMF). These self-same programmes are notorious for having anti-social strategies directed purely at liberalisation. The aim of the EU-Mediterranean partnership must be to redress the balance between the northern and southern regions of the Mediterranean area, improve people’s quality of life and promote understanding between the inhabitants of the various regions. But if free trade becomes the guiding principle, these goals will become nothing more than window dressing, and a handful of wealthy people will once again be the ones to benefit. I also protest against the fact that the EU-Mediterranean partnership is being misused as an instrument in order to prevent people from migrating from this region to the EU. For a while now, the European Union has had the ‘fight against illegal immigration’ and the ‘repatriation of ‘illegal’ refugees written as objectives into treaties with the Mediterranean States, as well as into every agreement with one or more third countries. In this way, each individual agreement adds one more brick to fortress Europe. This report is another example of the EU policy of pulling up the drawbridge where immigrants and refugees are concerned. The countries of the southern Mediterranean region have been declared as the forecourts to fortress Europe. It is their duty to ensure that ‘undesirable persons’ do not get into the EU. I ask myself how the EU can insist on the partner states in the Mediterranean showing respect for human rights and the freedom of the individual, when it does not respect the rights of immigrants itself, gives these people illegal status and wants to keep them away from Europe at any price, even if it leads to their being killed. This report safeguards, once again, the free movement of goods, services and capital. Once again, freedom and human rights are trampled underfoot. I will therefore vote against it, despite the fact that it contains a number of positive elements.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, at this stage of our assessment and appraisal of the pre-accession progress of the candidate countries, the Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities wants to make it perfectly clear that, as an integral aspect of respect for human rights, adopting the acquis communautaire on equality between men and women is a sine qua non to accession. In other words, these countries have to harmonise their national legislation with the acquis communautaire in the area of sexual equality, on the one hand, and develop institutions and mechanisms which allow appropriate policies to be applied on the other. It is clear from the opinions of our committee that women everywhere have difficulty accessing the job market and are under-represented at the centres of power. They also refer to specific problems such as high unemployment in Lithuania, the Czech Republic and Latvia and violence against and human trafficking of women in places such as Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Turkey. At the same time, we have welcomed positive achievements, such as state mechanisms in Lithuania to facilitate suitable policies and the employment rate among women in Cyprus, which is close to the Community average. Moreover, as the rapporteur Mr Poos mentioned, Cyprus is top of the league of negotiating countries and meets all the economic and political accession criteria. Consequently, we are entirely justified in believing and hoping that Cyprus will become a full member of the European Union as soon as the pre-accession procedure is completed even if, despite our efforts, no solution can be found to the Cyprus problem in the meantime, due to Turkey's intransigence. What our committee is calling for, Commissioner, to come back to women, is for candidate countries to take part in Community programmes which help safeguard women's rights and for civil society, and especially women's non-governmental organisations, to be encouraged to take part in these programmes.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as rapporteur for the own-initiative report on Directive 93/104/EC on the organisation of working time, I would request that the vote take place on Wednesday rather than tomorrow, since negotiations are being held between various parliamentary groups and they asked me a moment ago if we could do this. If possible, therefore, we would like to be able to continue working tomorrow and vote on the report on Wednesday.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say a few words about the enlargement of the European Union and about the relations with our new neighbours. This, the fifth enlargement of the European Union is, historically speaking, certainly one of the greatest challenges faced by the whole of Europe. Since 1 May we can say that there is no longer any reason to speak of a divided Europe, but of one united large European family, which must act according to common perceptions and rules. For this we also need the European Union’s Constitutional Treaty. Hopefully the drafting of the treaty will already be completed in June, since only then can we continue as the world’s most dynamic economic and political union. Enlargement has also given the European Union many new neighbours. Estonia, having spent many long years in the Soviet Union against its will, as a member of the European Union now has Russia as its direct neighbour, followed by Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova further to the south. Ladies and gentlemen, I am grateful for having been given the opportunity to spend a year as an observer in the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party in the European Parliament and in the Committee on Development and Cooperation, one of whose priorities is relations with the European Union’s neighbouring countries, and I would like to continue working in this committee. As a liberal, I wish to continue to support the European Union’s commitment to promote the development of democracy and press freedom in Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, and particularly in Russia. Estonia is a good example to them of the transition to a European country. Our experiences are necessary for the creation of a new and democratic Europe. Our investment in the development of our new neighbours is essential, since the existence of democratic neighbours is a complimentary security guarantee for the European Union itself, and fruitful mutual cooperation is a foundation for the future. I therefore await with interest the new development strategy for the European Union’s neighbourhood policy due to be drafted shortly.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, my apologies, I was looking at Amendment No 36, which logically precedes Amendment No 37. But, you are right, we are discussing Amendment No 37 and here too we have a similar problem. It is not the establishments but the instruments which should have a high rating. The text therefore reads: ‘instruments with a high rating base on a recognised rating scale are subject to reliable and verifiable valuation’. My apologies once again for my mistake.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, hundreds of thousands of people die each year from the use of perfectly legal drugs. Yet we subsidise the growing of tobacco plants while we cut down cannabis plants. It is all complete nonsense. The truth is that prohibition lies at the very heart of many of our problems. Prohibition creates huge profits for criminals, who seek to extend their market. Prohibition fosters corruption and theft. Prohibition denies drug users the information about content that is available to everyone who enjoys an alcohol drink in the evening. If health messages are to work and society is to be protected we must replace prohibition with government regulation. The criminals must be denied their profits if we are to bring these problems under control. This paper is an excellent step forward. It ignores the moral outrage which has been expressed so often in the past. It concentrates on pragmatic and sensible steps to inform people and reduce harm. It is in complete contrast to the Swedish approach, which I find utterly appalling. As Mr Bowis said, just saying 'no' does not work - it certainly does not work in most of the societies in which we live. The idea that we should try and prevent needle exchanges, for example, will simply mean more deaths, more blood poisoning, more AIDS. It is a vicious and cruel approach.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would ask Members to ponder one question: is it viable in today's world for all matters of asylum policy to be decided within the parameters of the Geneva Convention? The Geneva Convention drafted in 1951 was conceived as a temporary measure. It was negotiated in a very different world – a world still haunted by the shameful failure of Western countries to offer sanctuary to the victims of European fascism. It was designed first and foremost to ensure that refugees from communist tyranny would have access to safe havens. But the world has moved on. Mass air travel has facilitated unprecedented migratory flows. The great majority of those seeking better lives in new countries are actuated by understandable – indeed laudable – economic motives. But the terms of the 1951 Convention, and specifically the requirement to assess all claims individually, even if the applicant is manifestly coming from a safe country, encourage economic migrants to seek entry as refugees. This clogs the system to the disbenefit of those genuinely fleeing from injustice and wrong. I support, as Mr Pirker's report does, a degree of controlled primary immigration. All countries can benefit from the energy and enterprise of people who are prepared to cross whole continents in search of a better future. For such a policy to gain public consent it must be fair and transparent and it must be open to account. It cannot be right for the judiciaries of our Members States, by applying a peculiar interpretation of the 1951 Convention, to operate an immigration policy beyond the control of elected politicians. If we want to manage a sustainable policy of legal immigration and, at the same time, protect the rights of those most in need of sanctuary, we must take back control of our asylum laws from the judges. Far from enlarging the scope of the Geneva Convention, as Mr Evans suggests, we should scrap this outmoded accord and replace it with something more suited to the modern world.

Political group: PPE-DE
The /EFA Group welcomes this report by Mrs Fourtou on Silicone Implants as a step forward in aiming to improve both the availability of information to those considering such implants and in the follow-up of the potential impact on their health. This report is also valuable in that it stems directly from the action of citizens bringing the issue to Parliament’s Committee on Petitions – an opportunity available to anyone in the EU where they have concerns about EU legislation and its implementation, or the lack of such legislation. The petitioners were people concerned, often directly, about the harmful impact of silicone implants for their health. They spoke movingly to the Committee, research was commissioned via STOA, and this report reflects the outcome. My Group welcomes the recommendation for further, more specific research. We also welcome the recommendation for a minimum age for such surgical intervention. It is of great concern to us that many young women feel the need to resort to cosmetic surgery in the search for a more perfect body in order to feel that they fit in to society, rather than society being willing to readily accept people, whatever their size and shape. There is a need in a number of member states for cosmetic surgery, particularly that offered privately, to be effectively regulated and for all patients to be given full information. The patient register is an important proposal as it will help in future research but also to reach women who may be felt to be at risk in the event of any future problem with a particular implant. I trust that the Commission communication will include the recommendations of this House.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, we must back a transport system in Europe that makes high demands in terms of the environment and safety. I therefore wish to thank the Commission and the rapporteur for the work that has been done on the White Paper. We are now emphasising even more clearly what we want to achieve in terms of the environment and safety. I appreciate our now being able to make a start on this work. I also appreciate, and completely support, the proposals to transfer freight from roads to railways and the sea. That is important. We must, however, remember that roads are of very great importance in certain parts of the EU, for example in the sparsely populated and peripheral regions. The various forms of transport must therefore complement one another. It is a great challenge to create a transport system in the EU because Europe does not constitute a homogeneous geographical area. We must therefore take account of different conditions, and trans-European networks are very important. It is important to create TEN corridors. If we invest in east-west TEN corridors, we can relieve the pressure on the central regions with their very high traffic density. There are advantages to backing trans-European networks. The rapporteur has very clearly succeeded in emphasising the importance of the peripheral regions and the regions characterised by long distances. The report sees increased account being taken of these aspects. I nonetheless have a number of points to make. I agree that we have great investment needs and that we must use trans-European networks. When it comes to item 79, I am able to accept the proposal that the Commission conduct a study concerning the development of new methods of funding major infrastructure projects. With regard to the proposal for a road safety authority, I take it that such an authority would have the task of encouraging constructive schemes, have a bottom-up perspective and promote cooperation at different levels. We must improve road safety in the EU. We are now awaiting the Commission’s third road safety programme and have been doing so for a long time. I hope that it will be in place soon.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I want to begin by congratulating the rapporteur on my own behalf and on behalf of the , for this report provides a very good overview of how the Cohesion Fund has operated and of the work that was done in the course of 1998. I am particularly pleased with developments, which tend towards increased investment in the railway sector, ports and marine transport. Unfortunately, there is still quite a large imbalance in relation to the roads sector. We have therefore tabled an amendment to the effect that investment in the roads sector should not represent more than a quarter of all investments in transport sector infrastructure so that it will be possible to comply with the guidelines for budget item B5-7, which deals with trans-European networks. This is something which, in our view, is very important. We should like, on the whole, to see a more balanced investment policy, aimed at increasing diversification and investment in the environment and, at the same time, reducing investment in the roads sector. We also welcome the fact that the Committee accepted our proposal, which is now point 9, requiring that it should also be possible to use resources available for environmental projects for financing projects designed both to preserve and to carry out assessments of biological diversity. Investment in methods of dealing with waste in as environmentally friendly ways as possible is discussed well enough in point 8. We would nonetheless add something in the form of Amendment 3, which makes it clear that priority ought to be given to efforts to promote recycling and re-use. Naturally, the amount of waste ought also to be reduced. In addition to these environment-related amendments, we also have an amendment about the need to comply with the additionality principle. We would ask the Commission to submit a report on the extent to which the additionality principle is respected when resources are obtained from the Cohesion Fund.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, when the Commission tabled this proposal, I thought this must mean the implementation of Article 16 of the Water Framework Directive, the definition of priority hazardous substances. Let us push this through as quickly as possible, I thought, so that it can be implemented without delay. However, when I examined the proposal more closely, I discovered that there was a third category. Alongside priority hazardous substances and regular hazardous substances, we also have the ‘three-star’ category. The Commission evidently has reason to believe that these may be priority hazardous substances but is not sure whether they should be classified as such at this stage. The introduction of a ‘three-star’ category, Commissioner, is surely inconsistent with the Water Framework Directive. I therefore believe that we must press for the removal of this ‘three-star’ category as soon as possible. Either they are priority hazardous substances and must be phased out or they are not. We cannot accept this intermediate category. It covers substances for which there are real indications of serious risk, as in the cases of lead, lead compounds and some herbicides and pesticides. The Commission clearly has certain grounds for assuming, Commissioner, that these may belong to the category of priority hazardous substances. For that reason, the Commission must eliminate this ‘three-star’ category as soon as possible. It is my view that this must be done before the normal review date. Now whether this means that it must be eliminated by 1 July 2002, as specified in the decision we adopted in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, or whether the Commission must table a draft containing supplementary provisions as soon as possible is a question that may be left open for the moment. The crux of the matter is that the ‘three-star’ category must disappear before the review. For this reason, may I ask the Commissioner directly whether she can guarantee that the Commission will deliver a final decision on the ‘three-star’ category as soon as possible, in other words during its present term of office, so that the Council and Parliament can affix their legislative seal of approval?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Afghanistan has the worst human rights record in the world, both in terms of the number and the severity of the violations committed. The predicament of Afghan women is a particularly apt case in point. Women cannot go to work, girls cannot go to school, women cannot walk freely down the street, and they are stoned, to name but a few examples. There is not a single human rights organisation working in Afghanistan. It is the country that has the most mines. It is a country where there is no hope for the children. 75% of the boys and 90% of the girls do not go to school. It is one of the poorest countries and there is a forgotten war going on. I feel this all goes to show just how important this resolution is. On balance, it is clear that the international organisations and the UN are not doing enough as matters stand. In other words, the conflict is far more complex, there is no solution in the offing and yet, as we all agree, there is an urgent need for one. The EU has an important task before it in this respect. It could bring its ideas on non-military conflict management to bear. There are a few examples I could mention: the monitoring of weapons exports and small arms through to the end-user, so that we do not secretly aid and abet the conflict out there, support for non-governmental organisations and women’s organisations based there, which are courageous enough to take action despite the hopelessness of the situation. In particular, in light of the above, it is absolutely imperative that the Member States grant asylum to all those who flee Afghanistan, as a matter of course. It would do the EU’s image no harm at all if it were to get a political initiative off the ground in the United Nations, with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the conflicts in Afghanistan.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I think that on seeing the iron curtain fall and the Soviet Union collapse, we were all convinced that a great opportunity had arisen for development, peace and progress throughout Central and Eastern Europe. We convinced ourselves that this was the end of history, that we were facing a new dawn. Perhaps one of the most tragic refutations of this hope is the case of Moldova, which is a perfect example of how history does not always take the direction its leading figures set out for it and is one of the worst examples of this in modern Europe. It is an example of a country riven by ethnic conflict, with part of it being occupied by foreign military forces, with its economy in a state of total collapse, with mafias in control and with the country’s inhabitants trying to leave the country by any means available. We must not forget that, as of 2007, according to the official timetable for enlargement, the European Union will share a border with Moldova. Consequently, and here I address my words directly to the Commissioner, Moldova must be seen not as an issue of minor importance, but as a priority for European diplomacy. The current state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue, and this resolution must be seen as a loud wake-up call to all the institutions to pay Moldova the greatest attention and to attempt to find a solution to the current conflict, which is undermining the stability of that country and that of Central and Eastern Europe as a whole.

Political group: PSE