GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union cannot merely be an area for the free movement of capital, products and services; it must also be a Europe of free movement of citizens without prejudice to their rights. The entry into force of the European Health Insurance Card will be a great step towards achieving this fundamental objective. In the Barcelona conclusions of March 2002, it had been agreed to create a European health card as a means of removing the barriers to geographical mobility. Facilitating the free movement of people in the European Union is thus the objective. Supporting this report now is a necessary condition for us all to benefit from this step forward for the Community in 2004. I congratulate Mrs Jensen, the rapporteur, on the good work she has done. I also applaud the Commission for its diligence and commitment in putting this ambition into practice, as well as the highly positive collaboration of the Council. The entry into force of the European Health Insurance Card will result in a harmonisation of the rights of insured people and their family members whether they are travelling, studying or posted abroad, or are job-seekers or international road transport drivers. All citizens will be entitled to benefits in kind when seeking medical care during their stay in a Member State, and will avoid the complicated bureaucratic process that currently involves the intervention of various different bodies. In order to create the environment needed for the adoption of this card, the regulations implementing social security schemes, namely Regulations No 1408/71 and No 572/72, must first be amended. I am pleased to note the agreement reached with the Council on the revision of Regulation No 1408/71. With the adoption of this single, personalised document, the various forms currently in use will be eliminated, the rights of the insured will be harmonised and formalities simplified. Eliminating the existing forms will, however, take place in stages. Such changes mean that the insured must be properly informed on their rights and duties deriving from the new legislation and it will be up to the Member States to ensure that their citizens are given this information. The creation of the European Health Insurance Card is, therefore, an ambition that has become reality, but it is also a symbol of Europe and a tool that strengthens the feeling of belonging to the European Union.

Political group: PPE-DE
I have voted against the motion for a resolution. This initiative and its classification are, in my view, the wrong way for the European Parliament to handle such a fundamental constitutional issue as the entire EU decision mechanism, including the proposal to abolish the pillar structure in the area of justice in favour of the Community method with full co-determination for the European Parliament. The Posselt report has not been before the Standing Committee on the Constitution, which is a clear omission. In point 33, for example, the wording is very unclear and also poorly supported on such an important issue as whether the European Union should establish its own force for European border protection. - González Álvarez report (A5-0133/2001) . – (IT) Mr President, I would like to address Mr González Álvarez, if I may, for, last night, the great Italian fashion designer Valentino phoned me. 'Hello. Is Mr Fatuzzo there?' 'Speaking,' I replied. 'Mr Fatuzzo,' said Valentino, 'we Italian, French and European fashion designers are extremely concerned. 'What about?' I asked him. 'We are concerned about Mrs Laura González Álvarez' report on product safety because, you see, our products, our clothes are dangerous. We consider them dangerous because they are sexy, provocative and fascinating.' 'That is true,' I said, 'but why are you phoning me? I am the representative of the Pensioners' Party.' 'Because,' Mr Valentino replied, 'as you know, pensioners sometimes suffer from heart problems and so your votes are even more dangerous for them. Please help us!' I therefore voted for the motion in order to prevent safety criteria being applied to clothes.

Political group: PPE-DE
The Commission’s intention with this proposal, which has been accepted by the rapporteur, is primarily to guarantee the funding of 12 priority projects in the field of energy, whilst also ensuring that the Barcelona conclusions are implemented, particularly with regard to the liberalisation of the energy sector. These are the reasons why the Commission proposes to increase Community cofinancing from 10% to 20%. In addition to a change of priorities in the field of the trans-European networks, the proposal also and once again provides a shift of focus, relocating it to Eastern Europe, to the detriment of the current cohesion countries, such as Portugal, which are given only marginal consideration in the document. The proposal suggests further needs of EUR 150 million for the financial perspectives for the 2000-2006 period. The Commission intends to provide funding of EUR 100 million, however, using amounts included in the current threshold for internal policies, which will provide greater openings for other objectives under this budget heading. The Commission also proposes to reallocate EUR 50 million in favour of cross-border projects within the current transport TENs envelope. Under these circumstances, this proposal does not deserve our support. - Report Mayol i Raynal (A5-0218/2002)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Russian government will be tempted to draw parallels between our action against Serbia to end the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and their action against Chechen crime. This is strangely voiced at the extreme left of this Parliament. I personally think that this comparison is rather far-fetched, but it is useful to remind ourselves of the discrepancies. Our action and that of NATO in Kosovo and Serbia was undertaken with an extremely selective application of the least possible violence, sparing the civilian population as much as possible. Therein lies the huge difference between our action and the action Russia is taking in Chechnya at the moment. It is useful that the extreme left should remind us of this difference, although quite unintended. Also, human life appears to be of no consequence and refugees are of no concern. Long lines of refugees are kept waiting at the border and international aid organisations fail to offer real help due to a lack of cooperation. This is another clear difference and it is really good that the extreme left have underscored these huge differences between Russia’s action in Chechnya and that of NATO in Kosovo. Mr President, it is essential that clear-cut measures be taken and that we give the Russian population some sort of message. Indeed, we received the delegation from the Russian Parliament here and we noticed that there is, in fact, a common opinion amongst the Russian representatives there and they were not all from the same party. This stood out to us. We will have therefore have to give the Russian population a message which is loud and clear so that they might start to question the events in Chechnya and their government’s action. I am sure we will need to bring some pressure to bear in Russia if we are to put an end to these Russian crimes once again. This is why I think, following on from what Mr Patten said during his hearing, that it is bad doing business with states which violate human rights on a massive scale – he was talking about China in response to a question raised by us – and that it is in fact beneficial to consider financial-economic measures when it comes to giving a clear message. We may be able to call on our friends from the Council of Europe too to consider a suspension. Mr President, I think we as a Parliament should take a clear stance and express our support for the Chechen population and, for this reason, it is important to my mind that the President of the European Parliament meet the Chechen Foreign Minister in order to explain our stance.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like firstly to congratulate Mr Andreasen, not only on the timeliness and necessity of his report, but for the quality of his work which has impressed us very much. This report supplements, strengthens and, in a positive sense, counterbalances the communications which we have received from the Commission since Commissioner Vitorino took up this post. I am sure that the Commissioner will agree with me that the Andreasen report comes at a very appropriate time to improve the future communication which the Commission is going to present to us in June. At the moment, without wishing to be over-optimistic, I believe that we can say that the information and communication machinery of the European institutions is well-oiled, the defects have been detected and the instruments fine-tuned. What we must do is act according to the guidelines indicated in the Commission’s documents which have now been so wonderfully complemented by the Andreasen report. Commissioner, I did want to mention a worrying aspect on which I agree with the rapporteur: the budgetary forecasts for the coming years show a decreasing trend in this area. And, while it is true that the euro campaign has turned out to be very successful and that its entry into circulation is a great boost, there are other great challenges such as institutional reform and enlargement, which will still demand a great effort over the coming years. And I therefore believe that both the Commission, which is responsible for preparing the draft budget, and Parliament, as the budgetary authority, should be very attentive to these needs. Mr President, information and communication are key elements for the success of European construction and I believe that we must communicate the idea that the Union is a community of values, a legal and political entity which has no historical precedent, which defines a new concept of transnational citizenship, to every corner of the Fifteen countries and all future Member States. This is the message we must communicate and, if we manage to deliver it to its destination, we will make Europe a principal player which is respected on the world stage. There is no doubt that Mr Andreasen’s report is an excellent contribution to this task.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, with the entry into force of the new Financial Regulation, the subsidies of the former Part A and some of them from the former Part B of the Budget, which did not have basic instruments, required those basic instruments to be adopted in order to be implemented. To this end, the Commission presented seven basic instruments which are currently under discussion in five parliamentary committees. The initial objective was that they would be approved for the action programmes to enter into force from 2004. As draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Budgets for the seven proposals, I can only deplore the Commission's delay in presenting them, because this means that the various Parliamentary committees involved are also working behind schedule and against the clock, and this makes it difficult for us to respect the strengthened cooperation between committees which is applicable for this procedure. Furthermore, we must also remember that some of the proposals pose particular difficulties, as in the case of pre-allocations, amongst other things. In addition, if we bear in mind that the various competent working groups in the Council are also significantly behind schedule, as well as the difficulties we are expecting in terms of reaching a consensus between Council and Parliament – four of the proposals involve the codecision procedure – we must recognise, as realists, that the outlook is not very encouraging and that it may, therefore, be very difficult to fulfil the compromise which Parliament and the Council reached in the conciliation of 16 July so that these legal bases could be adopted before the end of 2003. The Committee on Budgets, by means of the Mulder report, requests, Commissioner, that the European Commission provide for the implementation of exceptional transitional measures which allow subsidies to be allocated during 2004, as laid down in the presentation of its proposals. Regardless of the final result, therefore, in the basic instruments relating to the issue of pre-allocations, at first reading the Committee on Budgets has maintained the pre-allocation in the corresponding lines for the 2004 budget, as was done in previous years. All this will allow the various associations to be able to benefit from subsidies in 2004 under the same conditions applicable until now. Above all, however, the rapporteur believes that, if we can have a transitional period, we will be better able to prepare the negotiations for the conciliation procedure with the Council, as well as the second reading, and not once again be slaves to the timetable; otherwise, not only will the rigour and responsibility required of this institution be prejudiced, because we are legislating, but, in particular, so will the action programmes and their beneficiaries.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, Mr President of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, I do not believe that the Governments of the 15 Member States have covered themselves in glory. The euro bobs feebly up and down in the shallows, responsibility for BSE is shuttled about in a deadly game of pass-the-parcel, and, as the Union prepares to face the greatest challenge in its history, the governments, instead of vigorously addressing the urgent problems, are still embroiled behind closed doors in petty squabbling about the so-called Amsterdam leftovers. The moment of truth is approaching in Nice. The summit will only be a success if it opts for truly comprehensive reform of the institutions and sends a clear signal that this Union is capable of enlargement. This means that there must be an efficient and strengthened Commission which is able to perform its function as the engine of integration. It also implies a balanced distribution of voting rights among the large and small states in the Council, and it means that majority decision-making in the Council must become the norm, even for key policy areas such as taxes, social policy, justice and home affairs. If democracy is to be strengthened, this naturally implies that majority voting must be accompanied by a right of codecision for the European Parliament. But success in Nice also means that there must be more than mere proclamation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. I find it quite intolerable that several governments have simply brushed aside the question of including a reference to the Charter in Article 6 of the Treaty. Let me say clearly, just as other Members before me have done, that in my view a reference to the Charter in the Treaty is just as indispensable as a broad public debate with the people of the Union. To the Presidents of the Council and the Commission, may I say that the Union has no need of a military reaction force or of arms modernisation programmes that devour billions. The real success or failure of Nice will be measured by whether governments finally begin to take people's concerns and needs seriously. It is a good thing that thousands will be taking to the streets of Nice and actively demanding a socially responsive Europe. The European Union must attach foremost political priority to the struggle against unemployment, poverty and social exclusion. I note that the French Presidency of the Council intends to devote itself to this cause, but please, Minister, convey to your colleagues that deeds, not words, are what will count.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, although we are talking about the constitution as a means of making the European Union transparent, comprehensible and more democratic, I see a danger in that the same Council that is to make a decision on the constitution is, when it comes to a decision on the Trans-European Networks, breaking the law as it currently stands and trampling Parliament’s rights underfoot. Mr President-in-Office of the Council, the present Treaties state that decisions on the Trans-European Networks, including the priority list – perhaps the President-in-Office of the Council would be so kind as to listen to me, and the honourable gentleman could perhaps move to one side – according to the present Treaties, the revision of the Trans-European Networks is subject to codecision by the Council and Parliament and is not within the decision-making competence of the European Council. The European Council exists to set down policy guidelines. If, though, the Brussels European Council, in the course of revising the Trans-European Networks were to make decisions on the list of actual priority transport projects that had the effect that practically all the funds for the next few years were spent, then that would be a flagrant violation of Parliament’s right to share equally with the Council in decisions concerning the Trans-European Networks and their revision. I therefore appeal to the representatives of the Council to take care that the European Summit does not trample upon those rights that the present Parliament already possesses. I also appeal to the President of the Commission: it would be devastating if you, Mr President of the Commission, having made such a clear statement on democratic and parliamentary rights, were, at the Council, to so tangibly to ally yourself with a Council which defines the priority projects in such a way that the European Parliament’s rights of codecision are practically nullified. Let us see to it that this European Council does not take back the rights of codecision on Trans-European Networks that Parliament already possesses. We want more rights; we want a democratic and more transparent Europe. I hope, Mr President-in-Office, that you can provide us with them.

Political group: PPE-DE
The Swedish and Danish Social Democrats have today voted against Oliver Duhamel’s report on incorporating the Treaties into a constitution. The report is based upon an assumption that the Treaties are to contain a fundamental element, that the common policies are to be included as protocols to the framework treaty and that there are to be different procedures for adapting the different texts. We believe that the basis for cooperation in the EU should continue to be unanimity on the basic questions concerning the legal base on which the EU is founded. We cannot therefore vote in favour of the report. We nonetheless agree with the report when it points out that, in their present wording, the Treaties leave a lot to be desired in terms of simplicity and transparency. We should therefore like to see the texts reworked in such a way as to permit more rational and intelligible access to the objectives in developing the EU and to the resources for doing so.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, the Commission proposal has the basic objective of encouraging cooperation between the Member States in terms of analysis, research and monitoring of employment policy, determining best practices and promoting the exchange and transfer of information and experiences. Thus, based on the need to support and develop the European Employment Strategy, the Commission is proposing a series of measures, which include analysis, research and cooperation between Member States on employment, which will be very helpful for achieving the new strategic objective established in Lisbon, which is to make Europe the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, with more and better jobs and with greater social cohesion. We therefore fully support the Commission proposal, although I feel that it could be improved on some points which, broadly speaking, are as follows: firstly, and with regard to the planned Community measures, one of them supports a more strategic approach to employment in the Union, through analysis and evaluation of the factors that explain employment tendencies, the general political framework, etc. On this point the Commission proposal does not envisage that the analysis and evaluation will be conducted in a specific way, for men and for women, something that I consider to be essential if we take into account that unemployment in Europe is largely among women. It is not excessive to say that, if employment among women were not taken into account, in some regions of the Union there would even be full employment. With this in mind, and given that employment incentive measures must be one of the key tools for developing equal opportunities, we need to consider what women’s employment needs are. We therefore need to consider which are the studies aimed at offering more childcare and social assistance in the home. In this respect, we need to ensure that there is sufficient supply of quality services, particularly when dealing with dependants, which in the majority of cases are the responsibility of women. We therefore need to encourage the incorporation of women into the labour market and encourage them to remain in it, with an equal distribution of family responsibilities between men and women. We need to take into account the reinsertion of women and, without any doubt, differentiating between the studies by sex would help us to understand the problems that this raises.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, these two reports which the Group of the supports – and we should like to thank Mr Morillon for the work he has put into them – is an important contribution to Turkey’s rapprochement with Europe. I agree, however, with Mr Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra that these reports are part of a larger pattern in our relationship with Turkey. I think that the most important message which is coming out of the European Union at the present time is that Turkey is entitled to apply for membership of the Union. It might well be said that this is an opportunity which Turkey has had for almost thirty-five years, ever since the Association Agreement. It is, however, important that we point this out at the present time. We need a democratically stable, socially and economically developed Turkey in the European partnership. That is important for our security and our future in Europe. For us, the views of the democrats in Turkey and of those struggling for human rights within organisations dedicated to that purpose are obviously very significant. Almost all of these people are in favour of Turkey being regarded as an candidate country. The Kurdish question, the issue of Cyprus, torture and breaches of human rights are also, at a serious level, European matters which will be discussed, examined and dealt with at different monitoring stations within the European Union. In this way, resolutions and the war of words will be translated into the genuine work of reform involving clear and agreed goals. At a big international seminar two weeks ago, arranged by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, all the Turkish parties, including the old Welfare Party, declared themselves in favour of applicant states such as Turkey becoming members of the European Union. For Turkey, this now means that matters have become serious. The move must now be made from ambitions and intentions to the purposeful work of reform in accordance with the Copenhagen criteria. For our part, we now want to challenge the Turkish government to translate their words into action and show that they are serious in their endeavour to enter the European partnership. We should then demonstrate that we too are serious about their efforts.

Political group: PSE