GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I wish first of all to thank the rapporteur, Mr Garriga Polledo, for an excellent report. Next year’s budget will be a difficult one, with the accession of ten new Member States, bringing with them nine new official languages. This will be a very hard test for EU administration. The new Member States have to be included in the work of the EU as a whole. This means they also have to receive their rightful share of employees and officials to work in the EU’s different institutions. This is a massive recruitment and training exercise. The Commission’s request for 700 new posts is right, even if it is a huge number. At the same time, however, we have to guard against too much bureaucracy with regard to administration. The downward devolution of responsibility and power should continue, as should the clarification of personal accountability. Administration must move more in the direction of activity-based management, where what is most important is better productivity and cost-effectiveness. There should be special attention paid to improving internal security. This will mean, among other things, stepping up the fight against drugs and other international criminality, as well as illegal immigration. This will bring pressures for budget heading 3, ‘Internal Policies’, in particular. Regarding structural policy, we must once and for all be in a position to reduce the figure for outstanding commitments. Regarding the structure of the budget, we have to improve its degree of informativeness: it must be clearly evident what the costs and achievements of individual policy areas are. Members of Parliament must be able to see clearly what EU money has achieved or can achieve.

Political group: ELDR
I wish I was as confident as the Commissioner that compliance with present legislation by companies is something we take for granted. Sadly in recent years we have all too often seen some companies – not the majority – responsible for abuses in third countries, including the problem of child labour on which she was so eloquent when we spoke together at the EU Committee of the US Chamber of Commerce, to which I refer in the question. I am asking her for an assurance that Parliament's call for a legal base for monitoring European companies' actions in third countries will be included as one of the options in the Green Paper. I share her view that voluntary action is important. However, I put to her that she has to include the option of regulation. When we look at the actions against bribery and sex tourism, and when we look at the recent very interesting draft report of the International Council on Human Rights on the legal accountability of businesses, we see that world institutions are considering legal actions and legal responsibilities. I want an assurance that this will be discussed and therefore form the basis for consultations through her Green Paper.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Mrs Malliori recently took the first steps in the European Parliament to open up lines of thought that may lead to the legalisation of drugs. Now, the advocates of legalisation are going further and challenging existing international agreements. There is therefore good reason to stand up for what until now has been a wise policy on the part of the European Parliament. Mrs Buitenweg’s report urges a review of the UN conventions and the reclassification of drugs. The long-term aim seems to be a free market for certain drugs and then for all drugs and, subsequently, the decriminalisation of drug misuse. Neither I nor the Group of the European People’s Party can support this. Mrs Buitenweg presents the matter in a very intelligent way. It is only when the explanatory statement is studied that it is apparent that we are in actual fact concerned here with the legalisation of cannabis and that the long-term aim is to legalise all drugs. That is something that is apparent from various passages. The tone adopted by those who advocate legislation has changed and become more polished in recent years, giving greater reason for concern. Harm reduction sounds innocent enough, as if it meant reducing damage, but, if used wrongly, may conceivably become a tool for those who wish to legalise drugs. We are concerned here not only with methadone and needle exchange programmes but also with what is termed the safer use of drugs, as if there were any such thing. The pressure is increasing upon young people and families. It is no wonder that most parents are opposed to the legalisation of cannabis. The best thing society can do to help is not to increase access to drugs of any type. The EU is making important efforts to combat the drugs trade. We must not therefore open the way to further drug trading by the back door. I have three pieces of advice for the governments and the Commission in the run-up to the Vienna Summit. Firstly, do not touch the UN conventions, but push instead for their being implemented in full by all the Member States. Secondly, let issues of care and treatment remain national competences. On this matter, I am obviously thinking along the same lines as Mr Davies in wanting to respect the Member States’ different experiences and traditions in this area. Thirdly, an accessible and adequate supply of individually tailored care and rehabilitation services is a better route to countering misuse than the reclassification of different kinds of drugs. Market tools should be used for what there is a real desire to bring about: not more drugs or drug addicts, but more effective care with a view to leaving drug problems behind.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I share the objections of the Members who have just spoken about the unacceptability of a government such as that of Angola, which has for many years waged a civil war in that country and which has been accused by various organisations across the world of being corrupt, daring to attack the freedom of speech of a Member of the European Parliament who rightly criticised the abuse of human rights in Angola. I would also like to make it quite clear, however, that as regards the European institutions, this is not only a matter of ensuring that the European Parliament issues a protest and a repudiation. It would be useful if the Council, whose President is currently the Portuguese Prime Minister, could respond with equal vehemence to the criticism made of a Portuguese Member of this House, and did not maintain the equivocal stance that it has adopted concerning the offence that the Angolan Government has caused to that Member of this House, as well as to the institutions of the European Union. This House therefore clearly repudiates Angola’s attitude and hopes that the EU Council Presidency will also clearly voice this repudiation and will not remain silent in the face of these accusations.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the initiative to strengthen the standing of victims of crime is a real success story. In the beginning, most people were against it. Now, however, most of us agree, and that, I think, is a good thing. I welcome the proposal from Portugal for strengthening the standing of victims of crime in criminal procedure also, even though I have every respect for the views relating to legal aspects expressed by Mr Lehne earlier. People who are subjected to crime while exercising their right to freedom of movement must not have to suffer twice, inasmuch as they are badly treated. This is the case irrespective of the type of crime committed. It is a question of strengthening the standing of the victims, but it cannot be done without also talking about crime prevention measures. The best way of all of helping victims of crime is to ensure that no crime is committed in the first place, and the most important way of preventing crime is probably to disseminate information. Crime prevention measures must also aim to combat organised crime. Victims of crime must know their rights and what opportunities they actually have for receiving help. Most Member States provide some form of initial help for victims. Sometimes travellers need additional support and perhaps more support than the local population. It might be a matter of psychological support and help with the language as well as a whole number of other factors. It can be difficult for a foreign victim to follow the criminal procedures from a distance, and in this case it is clear that special measures are required. The victim must always have priority. Since it is not the perpetrator we must give priority to, it is disturbing to see the tendency in a number of Member States to start introducing nolle prosequi simply because the perpetrator meets the victim. I cannot support this sort of trend. Crimes must be solved, and if this does not happen it will, in the long term, threaten the democratic system. Who will then go out and vote if their problems are completely disregarded? In my country, the number of cases of assault is increasing, and barely 20 per cent of these cases are solved. This percentage is too low. Crime is no accident. A penalty also involves respect for the victim. We must never stray from the basic principle that individuals must always take responsibility for their own actions, either at the level of the Member State or at EU level. The State must ultimately take responsibility for its failure to protect the victim. Therefore, I am pleased that the rapporteur has drawn up this report, which I commend with enthusiasm. I would like to thank her for helping to strengthen the unified view of victims of crime in the Member States.

Political group: PPE-DE
This report ‘on Bulgaria’s progress towards accession’ describes the underlying economic and political aims of the current enlargement of the EU. The report is especially illuminating on economic questions: it ‘commends Bulgaria on its functioning market economy’, ‘encourages the government to continue with its economic reform programme’, ‘welcomes the increasing importance of the private sector’ and ‘is concerned that any postponement or cancellation of strategic privatisation procedures may lead to a reduction of foreign direct investment’. In other words, capitalism is welcomed and criticism is levelled at any reservations about the process of privatisation and at any obstacle to the greed of the current EU countries’ large-scale capital in Bulgaria’s strategic economic sectors. Cynically, the report ‘calls on Bulgaria to remove the need for EU nationals to have a permanent residence permit to perform economic activities’, while saying nothing about the unacceptable constraints imposed on Bulgarians as regards their freedom of movement and residence in EU countries, even after accession. The report also alludes to Bulgaria joining NATO, planned for 2004 – which remains an implied prerequisite for accession to the EU.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, we would like to present an oral amendment to Amendment No 5. Instead of “triggered by unrest and acts of violence starting in the early sixties”, we wish to replace the words “triggered by” with the words “which followed”. The intent of this oral amendment is just to clarify any misunderstanding that would justify the invasion by Turkey of Cyprus.

Political group: Verts-ALE
On 6 June I as rapporteur recommended to the Committee on Budgetary Control that we give the Commission a discharge for the 1998 financial year. Today I voted against that discharge. The deciding factor was the way the Commissioner for budgets handled the Fléchard case. This firm was suspected of fraud as early as 1992. Nonetheless, it was let off a fine to the tune of EUR 14.6 million. Nonetheless the Commission continued to do business with it all those years, without asking any questions. Now the Italian financial police are investigating and it is said that the firm is involved in shady deals and the black marketeering of butter on a grand scale. Of course, we must not prejudge. But the Commissioner for budgets does not have the right to refuse to tell us how many millions the Commission has paid to this firm over the past years. Mrs Schreyer promised the figures to the Committee on Budgetary Control on 24 May, but has still not produced them. She gives one excuse after another. On Tuesday, she tried to make this House believe, wrongly, that Regulation 2390/1999 prevented her from presenting the figures. The Community budget is not a matter of secrecy. If the Commission refuses to render account, our response can only be to refuse the discharge.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I also came here specially this morning to participate in the discussion. I would like to know when the schedule was decided. I have just realised that in fact this debate was scheduled to run from 9.00 to 10.30. I would therefore like to thank you, even so, for letting the Members of Parliament continue to express their views beyond 10.30. I shall send you a comment Nonetheless, I shall hope that in three months’ time, at the end of the year, we may once again have a meeting of this type in order to ascertain what follow-up there has been to the requests presented today. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
As I observed on a recent visit to Palestine, the Israeli Government is still building settlements and its wall of shame, despite criticism and protests. It has persisted in the military occupation, in destroying infrastructure, housing and other installations, in carrying out targeted killings, and in holding more than 7 000 Palestinian prisoners, almost 340 of whom are children, in Israeli jails. It has continued to violate the most fundamental rights of the Palestinian people on a regular basis, attacking Syria and conducting a campaign of genuine state terrorism. It is with frustration and indignation, therefore, that one hears speeches by Members of this House demanding respect for the Rule of Law. How can one demand that President Arafat and the Palestinian Government take steps to combat acts of terrorism while the Israeli military is occupying Palestine? The European Union must table initiatives and practical measures. The Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement between the EU and Israel must be suspended, as requested in the EP resolution on the ‘Situation in the Middle East’, of 10 April 2002. The Commission and the Council must table an initiative within the UN, demanding that the UN negotiations be concluded, recognising the Palestinians’ right to dignity and to their own independent state, and sending international observers and a UN-backed peacekeeping force to intervene.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, animal epidemics are not only important economic matters, they are also important from the point of view of consumer policy. Plus, animal epidemics are again costing us a great deal of money. The main objective of the directive is to create electronic data bases from which information on bovine animals and pigs, and how they are kept, can be accessed, in order to foster safety and transparency. These new data bases will form part of the bovine animal labelling and registration system set out in the regulation. However, as the implementation of this directive and the long-windedness of the codecision procedure have given rise to difficulties, the Commission has concluded that transitional measures should be introduced in order to avoid problems with the trade in live bovine animals and pigs. I agree with the rapporteur that Member States are always very slow to implement unwelcome Community legislation, which is why we need to discuss if a 3-year margin is really sensible. I think that Mr Daul’s proposed amendment of two years would be an excellent compromise. I should also like to point out in this connection that, rather than planting more trees, we need to clear the jungle of paragraphs and exemptions. Absolute account must be taken of the Economic and Social Committee’s reservations concerning strict limits on exemptions and harmonisation of veterinary legislation. I therefore fail to understand that some countries are doing their homework while others keep finding excuses and dragging their feet. All that does is distort competition and, for this reason, I vote that we make the regulation binding on everyone as quickly as possible.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, can I say that everyone in the Chamber this evening knows that the reason why this money is being held back in the system. It is because there is a great need for structural funding to be spent in our various countries and regions. We are now some two and a half years through the seven-year programme 2000-2006. We are thus over 30% of the way through, and we have grossly underspent. What we are doing now is giving the Member States the chance to get their act together and to spend this money, to help improve the environment, working conditions and employment prospects throughout our European Union. This is for the betterment of the economy as a whole and of conditions in our areas. We are taking a responsible attitude and I am delighted that we have unanimity round the Chamber this evening. I hope this will be reflected in the voting tomorrow. It is very important indeed for us to make sure that the countries spend this money, to allow the private sector to get its act together because, at the end of 2006, with enlargement, we, the existing fifteen countries, will lose the ability to have structural funding. The other five or ten countries coming into the European Union will demand structural funding for their countries. We will have a very rapid cut-off. It may well be that we do not even allow any overlapping into the year 2007-2008 on the spend if it gets further behind. I therefore urge every single government throughout the European Union to use this money, use it effectively and use it quickly. I thoroughly endorse the Chairman's guidance to us, as team captains so to speak, to make sure that we vote conclusively together tomorrow to withhold the necessary money and urge those countries to spend it properly.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party is very concerned about the evermore authoritarian developments in Russia, linked to the person of President Putin. The sudden dissolution of the government is further illustration of this. Democracy appears to be in retreat, instead of the reverse being the case, and the presidential election resembles more and more a farcical one-man show. The terrible acts of cruelty in Chechnya must cease, and the EU must act in such a way as to help bring about a solution as soon as possible. There are huge needs in the environmental area, and we regret the fact that Russia is unwilling to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The EU needs to have a strategic partnership with Russia. We wish, are able and ought to play our part, but such a partnership is not unconditional and cannot be dictated by Moscow. In this area, the ball now lies largely in Putin’s court. I also wish to thank Mr Belder for a very constructive report, which we can without difficulty vote in favour of.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, in addition to congratulating the rapporteur, I would like to highlight in this debate that the idea for this celebration originates from the Council of Europe, an institution with a particular sensitivity towards the cultural and social aspects of the old continent, which, with its initiative of increasing the knowledge and use of more languages by Europeans, hopes to promote understanding and tolerance and bring citizens closer together. When we speak of European languages, let us not forget that this does not only mean the official languages of the Member States. In Europe, many other languages are spoken, some of them thousands of years old such as Euskera in the Basque Country or Gaelic, whose origins have been lost in the mists of time, and others such as Catalan, Galician and Alsatian, which is spoken right here in Strasbourg. This initiative should also benefit all these other regional and minority languages, and the bodies created by the Member States to organise participation in the European Year of Languages must also include representatives of these other languages, which are also European, and which are the essence and lifeblood of the wealth of our unity in diversity. Furthermore, the learning of languages leads to an awareness of our cultural diversity and contributes to the eradication of xenophobia, racism and intolerance, which forms part of our Community objectives.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, not only today is the food inspectorate the focus of public attention; it will have to endure public scrutiny again in the near future when it starts to pursue the ambitious aim that has been set for it. We cannot expect it, however, to eradicate criminal practices, slackness and black sheep; that goes beyond its remit. I have sometimes had the impression in the course of the present discussion that the wheel is being reinvented in the realm of food safety. Not so; let me counter that view by putting it to you that no previous generation in our Member States has ever been able to choose from such a rich variety of good and safe foods. Inspections cannot turn unsafe food into safe food. Safe food must be produced. That is why I am in favour of unequivocal and stringent measures. From producer to consumer, from byre to buyer, from pitchfork to table fork, if you like – every link in the food-production chain, be it the initial input by the farmers, the processing of farm produce by the food industry or retail food sales and the preparation and serving of food in restaurants and canteens, etc., should be subject to far stricter control. The traceability of foodstuffs must be guaranteed throughout the entire production chain. This morning we are discussing the subject of the food inspectorate, and perhaps we shall be doing so again in the future. We are wondering whether it should be an agency or an authority, where its headquarters should be, where the line should be drawn between its sphere of responsibility and that of the national authorities or how the two can interact. Last but not least, we are discussing the powers of this new authority. My constituents will be hoping that this is not just another paper tiger. Let us hope that the rich cultural diversity which is reflected in our European menus will manage to survive intact in conformity with the safety and hygiene rules. I truly wish success to this new institution; may it ensure that we are not caught empty-handed again in the not too distant future when the next scandal comes along. IN THE CHAIR: MR IMBENIVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE