GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, strong competition, increasing concentration and globalisation are now key features of manufacturing industry around the world. This creates great advantages, but also disadvantages, for the consumer. Although there are numerous institutions in the EU Member States which are responsible for quality assurance and consumer product regulation, product recall is unfortunately becoming far more common. The purpose of this report is to enforce the precautionary principle in respect of any product placed on the market, and identify suitable approaches. I myself am a producer of consumer goods and so I would particularly like to thank the rapporteur for her proposed solutions, for the task is to protect producers as well as consumers. One option is to harmonise the regulations governing the authorities responsible for product safety. The network of information which will be required in this context will be broad. It is therefore appropriate to expand the existing directive first of all and revise it after a thorough appraisal of the situation. The market cannot be regulated. This is why preventive safety and health measures are especially important. The report contains numerous references to the fact that in the Member States, operators' and producers' rights take precedence over the rights of consumers. The purpose of the report is to change this situation. I fully support this objective. Due to the wide range of products available and the resulting risks to consumer safety and health, a new legislative approach is required. The report makes no secret of this fact. It also makes it clear that an export ban must be adopted for dangerous products. This issue has yet to be considered in detail, and in my view, the proposed period until 2003 is not too long for this process.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if the Millennium Round and its opening is to be a success, then we must immediately address and pin down some basic problems. These are of course areas – and I shall mention a few of them – determined by the Environment Committee where, in the past, we have found deficiencies, areas where there are loopholes, areas where we noticed snags and catches. I will now mention a few of the most important of these areas which the Environment Committee has determined and which it considers to be important. For example, as regards the precautionary principle, this must be clearly defined and we must have a definition as adopted at the Conference on the Environment and Development in Rio. This precautionary principle must be anchored in the WTO rules and regulations in a legally binding manner. Secondly, it must be possible to implement, for example, the Multilateral Environment Agreement without triggering conflicts with the WTO. Thirdly, the issue of providing information to consumers on preparation and production methods, commonly referred to as PPMs, and the possibility for Member States to take non-discriminatory measures. These issues must be included in the WTO negotiations. Allow me to say something on the dispute settlement procedure. The dispute settlement procedure, with which we have always had so many problems in the past, and many dispute procedures which we did have concerned the areas of environmental policy, consumer protection and animal protection, must become more transparent. It must ensure that scientific expertise is independent and unambiguous and then it must also be recognised. It must not be the case, as with hormones, that the European Union is able to provide scientific expertise on the danger of hormones whilst we are obliged to pay compensation. Such situations must not be repeated in the future. I have only mentioned a few of the most important points which my colleagues designate time and again as being important, because everyone will keep saying that in the World Trade Organisation environmental issues and consumer protection issues must be cited as a central theme. I would like to thank the rapporteurs and my colleagues in the Industry Committee, and this does not go without saying and is not always the case, for incorporating many of the points which were determined in the Environment Committee in the final report, for including them in the amendments of the rapporteur and in the compromise amendments so that much of what the Environment Committee considers important for Seattle has been taken up in the report of Mr Schwaiger. Mr Lamy, I therefore now ask you and the Commission to take up these points which I have mentioned here, and also more comprehensive points, to cement these basic points in the opening round and to ensure that in the Millennium Round in the coming years we can further develop them so that the World Trade Organisation is what we would like it to be – a social, just, environmentally-friendly trade organisation which allows us to conduct trade whilst allowing our people and our environment to exist.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, over the weekend of 6-7 December 2003, the number of innocent victims of the criminal invasion of Afghanistan by the American armed forces was increased by a further fifteen children, murdered during bombings by the occupying forces. Since the beginning of the invasion of Afghanistan, thousands of children and civilians have lost their lives, the pretext being to oust the Taliban but the real objective being to occupy Afghanistan. We also have a similar but even worse situation as a result of the illegal and barbaric invasion of Iraq by American and British forces. Nonetheless, while the European Parliament has shown particular sensitivity about the deaths among the invaders, observing one minute's silence in their memory, it is indifferent to the countless victims they have caused. Mr President, I should like to ask the Bureau to invite the House, during the next plenary, to observe one minute's silence in memory of the children and the thousands of other civilians who lost their lives during the above invasions.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in ancient times when the Olympic Games were being held in Greece, all wars stopped for the duration of the games. What a pity that this no longer happens. It was a tribute to human individuality and dignity. However, now we see that it is precisely sports shoes that have become a symbol for human exploitation. This resolution is a justified response to this exploitation. The standards of the International Labour Organisation ought to be binding throughout the world. The reverse is true at present. Ethical investors are punished because they are the victims of unfair competition. We must devise systems of inspection and raise awareness among our consumers and trade unions. The International Olympic Committee should not permit advertising of goods that are not made according to ethical standards. Europe should use these ILO standards not only as a label demonstrating social acceptability and fair trade but also as an organisational principle that we regard as binding for imports and exports. Of course, that is not yet possible but I hope that we can develop a strategy towards this end, so that in years to come when the Olympic Games take place we will be able to say that the rules for equitable world trade and production methods have been integrated into the world trade system itself. It is tempting to look well into the future. For example, Flanders is now putting itself forward as a candidate to host the 2016 Olympic Games. Can we not say that by 2016 we want a fairer world trade system based not on market value but on human dignity?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to start by congratulating the rapporteur, Mr Hernández Mollar, on the merit, quality and enormous usefulness of his report. In building an area of freedom, security and justice, citizens’ fundamental rights must always be fully respected and safeguarded and the principles governing a fair trial must be duly confirmed. This initiative consequently represents a further important step towards creating a genuine European area of justice by defining a set of minimum standards in the field of procedural safeguards in the Member States. This is an attempt to ensure homogenous protection throughout the Union of the individual rights of those accused, sentenced or convicted in criminal proceedings. Adopting these common standards is crucial to increasing the confidence and the faith which members of the public and the judicial authorities in one Member State have in the legal systems of all the other Member States. The Community judicial instrument on which these common standards will be based is intended to improve procedural safeguards throughout the territory of the Union without lowering the level of protection that is guaranteed in the various Member States. Mr Hernández Mollar has already referred to some of the relevant areas but I would like to highlight legal aid, the right to an interpreter and/or translator, the protection of particularly vulnerable categories – such as minors, persons with disabilities, the illiterate – consular assistance and the duty to inform everyone of their rights. The problem with these standards is not, in many cases, that they do not exist but rather hinges on the shortcomings in the way they are applied. The framework decisions must consequently include provisions that can be implemented effectively and sanctions, and must consider other fundamental rights of suspects and defendants in addition to those that have already been mentioned. In this context, the will, of course, vote in favour of the Hernández Mollar report. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the importance of young people’s involvement in society cannot be overemphasised. In the future young people will have greater responsibility as the age structure of Europe’s population alters and the proportion of young people diminishes. The Commission’s communication on objectives relating to the participation of the young and providing them with information is an important step forward in the strengthening of cooperation at EU level in youth policy. It is gratifying that the draft Constitution also recognises the importance of involving young people. Our rapporteur, Lissy Gröner, who with very good reason personifies Parliament’s youth policy, has once again done an excellent job. I, for my part, also want to thank the Commission for the work it has done for young people. The large-scale consultation process that preceded the White Paper relating to youth policy was a considerable effort that eventually inspired youth organisations to work at EU level. Now we have to ensure that support for the involvement of these organisations continues and that the results of their work are also visible in the Community’s youth policy. I am pleased that there was general agreement with my proposal to increase appropriations to youth organisations in this year’s budget, and the multiannual action programme to finance youth organisations now being finalised is also welcome as it at last guarantees a legal basis for them. The rapporteur’s call for young people being encouraged to take part in the first European elections of the enlarged EU is of primary importance. To make young people more active with regard to voting, alternative ways of casting one’s vote still being developed should now be exploited. The young are avid Internet users and voting this way could draw more young people to the ballot box. Although the procedure has many shortcomings in terms of election secrecy and freedom, it should not be totally ruled out. At least young people might become more pro-active in their voting habits if electronic ballot boxes introduced in a few Member States were located in places which are popular with the young. Enlargement will highlight the importance of pluralism in the European Union and, likewise, that of intercultural learning. The future youth programme will make it easier for young people to come into contact with one another and therefore help overcome prejudice. I wish in this connection to stress that intercultural learning should not just mean investment in cross-border cooperation between Member States. The Member States of the EU, both the current and the future ones, must provide opportunities for building contacts between young people from the predominant population and those from national minorities. Europe cannot afford to let nationalism and xenophobia grow.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, fair access to drugs to combat HIV and other diseases is, I believe, a very important issue. If we consider that in South Africa 50% of new AIDS cases are young persons under the age of 25, that means that a 15 year-old in South Africa today has a 50% risk of infection, and if we consider the effects of that situation – that the most active section of the population is affected – on those young people and also on the country’s development, then I think it is long overdue that we say something on the subject and send a signal in the right direction. We wish to encourage and create fair access to medicines and vaccines. We therefore greatly welcome Commissioner Lamy’s position and that he will give his backing to the developing countries and their right to a protection clause in the WTO and TRIPS Agreements. We must press for these life-saving drugs to be made available as cheaply as possible. For Europe, this means supporting the transfer of technology and local production capacity. If we are serious about global development, these are important demands and important steps that must be taken by Europe and all concerned.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, congratulations to the European Commission for making the programme for action against communicable diseases with its legal base in this area a priority. Also to the rapporteur, Mr Wijkman, for fighting for sufficient resources to meet the challenge with our full support from the Socialist Group and, of course, to those governments in developing countries that have been prepared to challenge taboos and to patient groups in those and other countries who set an example of the sort of change of attitude required, both of whom prove that the battle against HIV/AIDS can be won. But shame on the Commission for seeking to get the UN global funds on the cheap. Shame on this Parliament for voting against increases in funds devoted to reproductive health, which is integral to the fight against the spread of HIV. Shame on the pharmaceutical companies, who pretend to cut the cost of essential medicines when speaking to us in Europe but who fail to deliver in sub-Saharan Africa where the need is greatest.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, when we have something to say, we prefer to do so without delay. For that reason, I would really have liked us to have discussed the state of play on Galileo some time ago, and would also have liked to see more regular follow-up. The 2002 Commission communication has now, in 2004, been rendered obsolete by developments in the programme. We cannot carry on being so slow in the way we handle current information, for I fear that any delay in Galileo’s development will make for serious problems if it is to be launched, as planned, in 2008. Negotiations on the award of concessions must be completed without delay. Galileo is still running on schedule, but we have to ensure that it stays on it, albeit without detriment to the necessary care in examining the tenders submitted. We have to press on with the procedure and, of course, get the maximum use out of Galileo. Only then will we be able to be convincing on the international stage. In this respect, the signing of the EU’s agreement with China on the latter’s involvement in Galileo was a very important step, and others must follow. The fact that the Council has now mandated the Commission to start negotiating with Israel and India in February shows that we are making good progress by way of bilateral agreements, but it is also of great importance, as has been described in relation to the USA, that we should find a shared basis for cooperation. In this regard, making Galileo interoperable with GPS is a challenge we have to deal with, and both sides must make greater efforts. Recently, there have been major forward advances across the board, and I would like it if future developments were to justify the great confidence placed in Galileo around the world. Let me close by saying this: Commissioner de Palacio, you are right. Galileo is the third pillar in your personal recipe for success. We wish you a great deal more success in Washington, but also elsewhere, and Mr Piétrasanta also takes our best wishes with him as he embarks on his further career in politics.

Political group: PPE-DE
Last week, the American Senate agreed to a proposal which would make it possible to invade the European Union using military force. The reason for this improbable and tough provocation is the fact that the International Criminal Court will be based on European soil. The US is prepared to remove American suspects by force. The European Parliament has always been a staunch supporter of the International Criminal Court. Now that the US is trying to undermine its success with draconian measures of this kind, it is important for us to stand up for this Criminal Court. I deem it rather unlikely that the US will actually be besieging its NATO ally, the Netherlands, but the statement by the American senators is uncompromising. It requires a rapid and sharp reaction, including from Europe. I would therefore ask you to add this item to the transatlantic agenda and create an opportunity for this Parliament to discuss this matter with High Representative Solana. My group will be proposing an oral question and debate for the forthcoming plenary session.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I wish to tell the Commissioner that I am looking forward to meeting him tomorrow in order to exchange experiences and points of view concerning the social agenda. I shall then address the rapporteur, Mr Pérez Álvarez. I see that Mr Hughes is not here today. That is because it is sometimes difficult to make one’s way to Strasbourg because of the lack of air connections. Mr Hughes has got caught up on the way here. On behalf of the Group of the and of Mr Hughes, I wish to thank Mr Pérez Álvarez for his very constructive cooperation. The fact that we have obtained this result has a lot to do with the sound cooperation between the Group of the European People’s Party and the Group of the . Mr Pérez Álvarez and Mr Hughes have been the leading figures in this cooperation. We have set out in pursuit of two objectives. The first is to produce a sound directive in this area that guarantees employees’ health and security. The second objective has been to reach an agreement before the end of the term of office so that we do not keep putting off the issue. It has already been said that this directive is part of the health and safety and physical agents package. We have previously dealt successfully with vibrations and noise and are now dealing with electromagnetic fields and workers’ exposure to these. This affects many people in the labour market. Let me take a few examples in the form of people within health-care, large-scale catering and the metal industry. It is an important directive on which we now have to adopt a position. A debate has taken place on the long-term effects and on the difficulties of finding scientific observations enabling the long-term effects to be evaluated. I think that, through the amendments we have produced in the committee and for which we hope to obtain a hearing, we are highlighting some important matters. Firstly, consultation and cooperation with employees is being debated. Another important subject is, of course, prevention: that is to say, when an employee suffers overexposure, he should have an automatic right to health checks. If, in the course of these health checks, it emerges that the employee has suffered overexposure and been harmed, a further risk evaluation should be carried out. I consider this perhaps to be the most important proposal among the amendments now being tabled by our committee. It is also important that there should be serious consequences for those employers who do not comply with these recommendations. I must also mention the last amendment to the effect that there is a deadline before which the Commission must respond. If new findings come to light, the initiative must be taken and Parliament consulted again. Finally, I wish to say a big thank you. This has been an example of constructive cooperation, and I hope the outcome will be successful. I am convinced it will be. IN THE CHAIR: MR ONESTAVice-President

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to congratulate the Commissioner and Mrs de Sarnez on this ambitious programme, on this big, substantial step. Opening the Europe of education at international level, which is a daring move, promotes the European learning area and we are now starting to look at it not in a fragmentary manner, but with the bridges which it has, with the cooperation which it has, as a real area. I think that the Erasmus Mundus programme is of a different quality in comparison with all the previous programmes, precisely because it is not based simply on exchanges, on mobility; on the contrary, it gives us a new stamp, a new reference point, to which the thousands of students and the hundreds of education institutions using it will be able to give real meaning. It is very important that Europe has the courage today to open up to competition, to languages and to cross-cultural understanding. We reward both the institutions and cooperation between them under this programme, as well as promoting the excellence of the students from whichever country, continent or cultural background they come. That means we are promoting European values. I think that we owe it to them. More importantly, we have to give something back to the countries from which the millions of economic migrants come and I think that what we are giving, these grants we are giving, are recompense and I trust that the majority of students will come to us from these developing countries. European students, inoculated from cooperation with foreigners, have a great deal to gain and a great deal to understand from the culture which they will bring to us.

Political group: PSE
The very disappointing turnout in this year’s European elections provided dramatic proof, if proof was needed, that this Parliament’s visibility and relevance to the people of Europe need to be enhanced. I think two proposals relating to the calendar gave us an opportunity to improve both our working methods and our contact with the citizens. The proposal to shorten Strasbourg sessions to four days would have meant that MEPs could have been back in their constituencies for longer periods meeting groups, individuals and organisations and getting across the message about what we do here in Strasbourg and Brussels. The proposal to have a mini-mini-session in Brussels on a Wednesday – when, of course, MEPs are already in Brussels for Group and committee meetings – would have allowed the President of the Commission to come to Parliament and report on the outcome of the Commission’s weekly meeting, and thus demonstrate to the citizens that the Commission is responsible to Parliament and raise our profile by getting major Commission initiatives announced inside this institution. I regret that both proposals were rejected today, but I am sure colleagues will come back with future proposals at a later date.

Political group: PSE