GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the figures and images coming out of El Salvador are terrifying, with the hundreds of dead, the thousands of wounded, the hundreds of people who have disappeared and the approximately 26,000 who have lost their homes. There are continual aftershocks in El Salvador and even in Nicaragua. This situation occurring in Central America is nothing new. As Mrs Maes and Mr Poméz Ruiz pointed out, Hurricane Mitch, in November 1998, also had tragic consequences in both human and material terms in that part of the world. Central America is one of the world’s poorest regions. Around 40% of the population live below the poverty line and Europe therefore has a particular responsibility to the region not only because it is a region that has experienced much serious conflict and where there is still tension, particularly over borders, but also because we need to assist their recovery for the sake of democracy. I am happy to say that all bodies there are democratically elected, but very undemocratic habits still remain in these Central American countries. Apart from this, they have a very large foreign debt and only two countries are involved in the initiative that has been launched. Therefore, the impression we receive from the principal authorities in Central American countries – and on Tuesday we had the opportunity to receive the President of Honduras – is of a people that is suffering and that, just when it sees a little light at the end of the tunnel and starts to pick itself up in order to confront its problems and its history, is struck by tragic situations caused by these natural disasters. Europe acted promptly in sending emergency aid, both in November 1998 and this time. Nevertheless, the problem requires – as my two fellow Members have already stated more than adequately – more structural aid. It is vital that the Commission implements its reconstruction programme for Central America. What we are proposing, Commissioner Nielson, is that there should be a rapid redefinition of this programme, with greater resources, both human and financial, to achieve the objective of assisting El Salvador as well. On 26 March of this year, another meeting will be held between the San José Group and the European Union in Guatemala. A positive way to conclude this meeting with the San José Group would be to proceed to implement the reconstruction programme for Central America with the new procedure for helping the victims in El Salvador.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to mention with regard to the Minutes that the statement I made yesterday before the order of business about the Italian soldiers and policemen killed in Iraq also applies to the statement made by President Cox when he opened today's sitting with the same subject and to the minute's silence observed by the European Parliament.

Political group: GUE-NGL
President Gama, we welcome much of what you have said – regarding Parliament’s role, the Intergovernmental Conference and the Statute for the Members – but we shall also need to discuss the enlargement of the European Union. Enlarging eastwards is important. We want to construct a political Europe, but we need to take a careful look at the large Mediterranean basin itself – and Portugal, like Italy, is a Mediterranean country – in order to create a major Mediterranean policy as well and balance the expansion to the east with expansion to the south. As far as the European Council is concerned, we should briefly consider three issues in greater depth. You mentioned employment, and this is of the utmost importance for us. It is top of the list of urgent issues. We can fight it by assisting small and medium-sized businesses, boosting tourism with the help of the development policy and sharply reducing the tax burden. Furthermore, justice – as you stressed – matters a great deal to us. The policy on European justice is of major importance. There are slow trials, unfair trials – and Italy, unfortunately, holds the worst record for these – and in many European countries there is even politicised justice, with some magistrates using their power, not for the purposes of justice, but for political ends, often to attack the opposition and minorities. I would like to conclude by focusing on a third point, following on from employment and justice: the drugs crisis. This is an important social question of particular concern to us because it involves millions of young people. The fight against drugs must be one of the issues that the Portuguese Presidency, the European Commission and Parliament are committed to. We must combat the established drugs, but we must also and above all combat the new drugs, without giving in to the temptation to liberalise drugs and without giving in to the temptation to legalise and authorise the therapeutic use of substances, such as heroin, which Parliament has already rejected. Millions of young people pay great attention to what we are doing: they follow what goes on in Europe carefully, and expect Europe to give them an answer on this major issue.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am sure you agree with me that a victim of serious crime endures great pain and suffering, and this is doubly traumatic in a foreign country. I very much welcome the Commission communication. I welcome the range of proposals, not only as regards compensation but also the emphasis on the need for the availability of medical, psychological and counselling services for victims of crime. This Convention is dated 1983. We have had the Amsterdam Treaty which talks about creating an area of freedom, security and justice. We have had the Tampere Summit. While I recognise that you want to use this communication and debate in Parliament as an instrument to increase pressure on the Member States, I would urge that you create that pressure now and not just wait until this document goes through all the necessary channels in the EU. People have already waited long enough. You should increase the pressure on the seven Member States which have either failed to ratify or failed to sign the Convention.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I voted for the report although it does not distinguish clearly enough between Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro. President Kostunica was happy to have himself compared with General de Gaulle in a recent interview. But General de Gaulle was only able to play a major role once he had settled the Algerian problem. I believe that Serbia's 'Algerian problem' is Kosovo. Kosovo has the right to decide about its future independently and in partnership with its neighbours. So we must give President Rugova and President Kostunica a chance to negotiate democratically with each other. That is why we need early elections in Kosovo, cooperation in a spirit of partnership and an agreed solution for this region achieved in the same spirit.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the original proposed amendment increases the thresholds from 10% to 25%. Having consulted the Commission and the Council and the other groups, we have agreed to reduce this to 20%. I trust that this will not be interpreted as manipulation on my part and that there will be a broad consensus.

Political group: PPE-DE
This is indeed a reference to previous comments, because I had the opportunity and also the satisfaction, let it be said in passing, to comment on a response from the European Commission, which was given in full accordance with the Rules, and I would therefore ask you, Mr President, to withdraw the reference to manipulation. There has been talk of first- and second-class citizens. The citizens from Mr Ortuondo Larrea’s region are not second-class citizens, of course, and yet are systematically threatened, forced to leave their homes and sometimes murdered. I would like Mr Ortuondo Larrea also to concern himself with these people who, I repeat, are not second-class citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, having listened to Mr Harbour, it seems to me that we are not going to have much debate tonight, because the Group of the European Peoples’ Party and the Socialist Group basically agree in their support for the Miller report and the proposals now being presented to us by the European Commission. I believe that Commissioner Kinnock is demonstrating his great parliamentary experience by negotiating this rather complex issue in a very efficient manner and I will simply make an observation on what we might call Mr Harbour’s obiter dictum. From the point of view of the Socialist Group, it is essential that the rights of officials be recognised, including acquired rights, as well as the existence of an administrative career path, and that it be recognised that officials of the European institutions are of high quality and have carried out very efficient work. Therefore, the officials should not be pursued, as it appears these last minute amendments intend to do, but this Community administration should be rapidly transformed without abandoning the essential principles of recognising an independent civil service and recognising an administrative career path. Of course, we agree with the proposals in the Miller report on the extending the facilities enjoyed by Commission officials to the officials of the other institutions, including the European Parliament, which I believe will take a favourable view of the amendments we are presenting, which, in summary, recognise the good work done by the Commission. So it only remains for me to congratulate Mr Miller on his report and Mr Kinnock on the skilful, capable and progressive way in which he has dealt with this first administrative reform.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, the European Convention proposes that the conservation of the sea’s biological resources must be the exclusive competence of the EU, while fishing should be an area in which the EU and the Member States have shared competence. This issue has been sidelined in the major debate about the future. Anyone familiar with issues relating to fisheries will find it very hard to understand that the Convention has proposed separating these areas. Rules concerning the way in which fishing is conducted are the very rules through which we enact decisions concerning the conservation of biological resources. Through provisions concerning mesh sizes, fishing periods and permitted gear, fishing can be regulated and the marine environment conserved. What, moreover, is really important for the marine environment is that aid to the floating fish factories should cease. For myself and many others, it is unclear how the Convention’s proposal would work in practice. What, for example, would it mean for seals and for the fishing industry? Where these matters are concerned, I hope that, for example, the Commissioner would explain to those who fish in the Kvarken straits, the Gulf of Finland and the archipelagoes what the outcome of this decision would be. I appeal to the Commission to clarify its positions on these issues too. If EU measures in favour of the marine environment are to produce results, there must be closer compliance with the rules, fewer exceptions and more effective international cooperation. We are successful internationally when we cooperate on matters such as the Oil Fund, to quote just one example. It also means, however, that the Member States must be prepared to take a stand on important proposals, such as the most recent one to impose penalties in connection with deliberate discharges of oil. Unfortunately, we see, however, the way in which legal hair-splitting constitutes an obstacle to the directive in the Council. Despite the fact that a Directive on oil reception facilities has been adopted, there has been no reduction in deliberate oil discharges. Commissioner, I would finally appeal to you to get a firm grip on HELCOM – the Helsinki Commission for Baltic Marine Environment Protection. It must not be a relic from the Cold War, merely issuing recommendations that do not lead to any measures being taken. Following the EU’s enlargement, it will be possible for HELCOM to be a body attending to its task in accordance with the Water Framework Directive. If it is to be reformed, HELCOM needs the support of the Commission, especially when, for the first time in history, the new boss, who takes office on 1 August, is a woman. This organisation can implement the regional way of tackling things that both Parliament and the Commission wish to see. I would also ask Commissioner Wallström to convince her colleague, Mrs de Palacio, that the Commission must be more active in supporting Finland and Sweden when it comes to ice classification. Unfortunately, it was only Italy and the Commission that opposed the Nordic proposals concerning clearer shipping rules in this part of the EU too.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, on a point of order, I support Mr Alavanos in what he says. If you are not going to allow him to take the floor, I would like to put a supplementary question to Commissioner Schreyer on Mrs Scallon's question. So either you give the floor to Mr Alavanos, or I would like to ask the Commissioner a supplementary question.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, Chairman of the Committee on Fisheries and dear friend, Mr Stevenson, ladies and gentlemen, I am speaking to you at a particularly difficult time for the autonomous region of the Azores, as has already been said. Things are also difficult, however, for all those who believe in sustainable development and in the need to reverse the trend of over-exploiting fishery resources and of exterminating species, which is leading our oceans and, with them, our fishing communities, to disaster. The Commission’s original proposal for the Western Waters and the Stevenson report both seek to uphold and strengthen existing legislation protecting the resources of Portugal’s Western Waters. Nevertheless, to our great surprise – as Mrs Figueiredo has already said – we have just discovered that the Council is preparing to dismantle all existing protection. The Council’s current position is an invitation to plunder and devastate the Western Waters, flying in the face of the scientific reports that conclude that there is an urgent need to restrict, rather than extend, access to the waters, it ignores the positions and interests of fishing communities and will, if adopted, inevitably lead to an unprecedented disaster. Commissioner, I should like to remind you of the answer you gave to my parliamentary question on the validity of the current regulations. You said at the time, Commissioner, in Question No 26: ‘... the Commission has a clear understanding of the validity of Regulations Nos 685 and 2027. Unless amended or repealed by the Community legislator, the rules established by the regulations will continue to apply.’ This is the opposite of what you have just said here! I fail to understand how your opinion can change completely in only three months! I should also like to clarify the following point: the rules for the accession of Portugal and Spain to the European Communities expired in 1995. We are not in a transitional period! A new set of regulations was adopted in 1995 to apply thereafter, with the agreement of everyone! This is what you now want to blow out of the water, to call into question in order to ruin Portuguese waters. This is completely unacceptable. I wish to conclude, furthermore, by saying that equality between those in completely different situations is nothing but humbug and not equality at all. We want to see equality between situations that are equal, not a pretence of equality that serves only to cover up a policy of destroying our resources. For this very reason, I wish to support the rapporteur and to call on all Members to vote for Amendment No 20 of this report tomorrow. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, it is, in fact, the third time within the space of six months that we have had to draw the Commission’s attention to the situation in the Moluccas. We are dissatisfied with the very restricted way in which the Commission has reacted to the resolutions so far. The violence in the Moluccas erupted as long ago as last year. Initially, it was dwarfed by the events in East Timor, but that does not make the situation in the Moluccas less serious. In October, hundreds of people were killed. Meanwhile, three months later, there are reports of thousands of killings and many more people wounded and becoming refugees. The causes are wide-ranging, of course. The area has been economically disadvantaged under the Suharto regime and this regime is also partly responsible for the country’s questionable migration policy. What is more serious, however, is the fact that there are now agitators, like on East Timor, who are setting groups of the population against each other, while the army is playing a questionable role, unfortunately. The latter was confirmed, in fact, in an interview with President Wahid last night on Dutch TV, in which he stated that the army’s behaviour in this conflict is also reprehensible. Our resolution’s criticism is emphatically not aimed at the new government in Indonesia, which is making a genuine effort to restore democracy and address the human rights violations. It seems that evil in Indonesia is mainly to be found in the form of aggressive Muslim organisations and agitators in sections of the army. What can the European Union do? To start with, it could give a warning sign, much like that given by Mr Holbrooke, that a coup d’état by the army in Indonesia will not be tolerated. Secondly, an independent committee of inquiry could be set up and sent to Indonesia, preferably with a UN mandate, to establish what has happened in the past couple of months. At the same time, a conciliation committee could be sent to the area to reconcile Muslims and Christians. President Wahid has already made this request and also put a name forward. It would be a good idea if the European Union were to support such an initiative. Of course, a great deal more aid is required than is given at present. Finally, I would like to point out that the arms embargo must be extended. There is every reason to do so as long as the role of the army is so questionable. I would like to note that the conflict and violence in the Moluccas have been going on for too long. The Netherlands has a large Moluccan community. It is a European community and for this reason, the European Union cannot ignore the problems of the Moluccas. We would urge both the Council and the Commission to be more decisive than they have been so far.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Zappalà report has become a controversial dossier in this House as a result of a number of amendments pertaining to the allocation phase of public tenders. It must be possible for social and environmental considerations to play their part in a public contracts dossier, provided this is at the level of the conformity requirements which describe the products or services and of the selection criteria which describe the potential suppliers taking part. These, however, cannot be the only considerations at the allocation stage, which must be capable of being based on an objective comparison. This is why I was unable to vote for many social and environmental amendments to the allocation criteria. The same applies to concerns regarding discrimination. This too must be counteracted. Legislative measures can be taken with this in mind, but such measures do not belong in the list of allocation criteria for public contracts. - Zappalà report (A5-0245/2003)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as Vice-President of Parliament responsible for relations with national parliaments, I very much welcome both the tone and the content of Mr Napolitano's report. I am convinced that his ideas will help us enhance what is already a good relationship between ourselves and our national counterparts. I strongly believe that this relationship is vital if we are to ensure that the EU is built on democratic foundations. However, I agree with some of my colleagues when they emphasise that the regional parliaments which have legislative powers are an equally important part of ensuring democracy in all EU decision-making. To take my own country, for example, over half the work of the Scottish Parliament is not about implementing laws thought of in Edinburgh or even implementing laws coming from London, but in fact about implementing laws from Brussels – about ensuring that EU laws are properly transposed into Scottish legislation. So while it is important that we look at national parliaments – and I continue to welcome the emphasis we give to that – we should also now consider how we might embrace the regional parliaments in our work.

Political group: PSE
Mr President of the Commission, there are so many cases of food contamination that there is no way that this phenomenon is arbitrary, neither is it the simple result of human error. In our opinion, the main cause is that the social system puts profit before human health, especially when it comes to the profits of large corporations and the health of their workers. The problem is further exacerbated by both the liberalisation of trade resulting in the circulation of products which have not undergone any fundamental inspections and the severe competition which has become an excuse for monopolies to seek out more unorthodox ways of cutting costs and increasing their profits. Thus, fundamental quality control is being left to the consumers themselves. Neither Mr Prodi’s statement nor the discussions so far have touched on the core of the matter. Our problem is not about the confidence or lack of confidence of the citizens. The matter will not be resolved with food labelling or White Papers, nor will it be resolved by increasing the directives from 100 to 150. If we do not tackle the irresponsibility of monopolies at all levels, the dangers will become even greater.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The Commissioner did not actually respond to my question as to what exactly the response has been from Member State governments. Also, in relation to the WTO, I notice the report lays great stress on the fact that the United States makes a major contribution to domestic aeronautical research. That point is precisely at the centre of the dispute over the 1992 agreement on large aircraft construction. Does not the Commissioner see this programme as being yet another opportunity for us to have a dispute with the United States of America? Finally, given that much of defence expenditure is now in the aeronautical area, is there a likelihood of a spill-over of this research programme into the field of defence?

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as regards the Miguélez Ramos report the Group considers that the conservation of fish stocks and the protection of the marine environment are of fundamental importance to the common fisheries policy. The alternative will inevitably be overfishing and problems for the industry in the long term. Given the importance of conservation this report falls very far short of what is really required. Among other things, it seeks to relieve the fishing sector of responsibility for depleted fish stocks by saying that it is the fault of pollution, habitat destruction etc. While these factors play a role, there is no doubt whatsoever that the major cause of depleted fish stocks is the excessive amount of fishing carried out by the fishing fleets of the European Union. It is time we stopped this state of denial and faced reality. We also object to the calls for alternatives to the decommissioning of fishing vessels, which is the single most important step towards allowing stocks to recover. We also need to look at the fact that vessels are being transported to other parts of the world, thereby simply passing the problem on. Considering the desperate need to incorporate the concept of environmental protection into fisheries, this report falls far short of what is required. The Group cannot support it.

Political group: Verts-ALE