GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the repressive process set in train with impunity against Cuban citizens in Cuba has shown up the Castro dictatorship in its true colours once again. All these individuals had done was to attempt to exercise their right to rights, as Oswaldo Payá explained in his address to this House. This amounts to a flagrant violation of fundamental rights and freedoms. In a sense too, it is a response to the Varela Project. The House is honour bound to respond with strong condemnation of the actions of the Castro regime and that caricature of justice subservient to the dictatorship. The House must call for all those imprisoned to be released. It must also speak out against what Oswaldo Payá described as the fallacy or myth that Cubans have to live without rights to sustain the independence and sovereignty of their country. Fundamental rights are not negotiable and their infringement can never be justified. We are called on to assure those fighting for the rights of all Cubans that we stand shoulder to shoulder with them and that their fight is our fight also. Indeed, it is our moral and political duty to do so. We should also assure those who have found the courage to support the Varela Project that we support their efforts to re-empower the people of Cuba by constitutional means. We must do more than simply condemn, however. I therefore call on the Commissioner to reject Cuba’s request to participate in the Cotonou Agreement if by the time the request comes up for consideration repression still persists and those detained have not been released. I would call on the Council to act in this way too, if the Council were represented here today. Article 9(2) of the aforementioned agreement requires Cuba to make a commitment to human rights. In no way can such a commitment be compatible with the repression currently endured by so many Cuban citizens merely because of their love of freedom.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, due to the absence of two dozen Members and the request for the quorum which we would have established without any difficulty, our Group yesterday chose to refrain from preventing the Buitenweg report from being put to the vote when this would have been quite possible. According to the agenda, the vote should have taken place today since the amendments were not put to the House in time yesterday. I appealed to the House to act fairly. I would urge the Members dealing with this matter to declare a moratorium. We are about to take up the matter of enhancing the status of Fridays. Of course, the best way to do this would have been by voting on this important report today. However, I believe Mrs Buitenweg cannot attend today’s sitting. In any event, we must nevertheless enhance the status of Fridays. Our Group is in the process of taking appropriate precautionary action. I would urge you to let us work fairly and to stop deliberately disrupting our work.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, once again, and in a similar situation to the one we saw last year, we are witnessing serious floods in Mozambique, which have claimed a considerable number of victims and caused enormous material damage. Once again, we wish to express our solidarity with the people of Mozambique and to ask the Community and the Member States to increase their emergency aid to that country. I wish to take this opportunity to mention Commissioner Nielson’s willingness to make statements on this subject to the Commission on Development and Cooperation and, particularly, his announcement here of extraordinary aid for Mozambique. I wish, nevertheless, to emphasise the need to find more rapid ways of achieving greater coordination and more effective mobilisation of resources, especially by the Member States, in order to address emergency situations such as this and with a view, in particular, to guaranteeing the evacuation of communities that are affected or at risk. Lastly, I should like to draw your attention to the urgent need for special consideration of the possibility of cancelling Mozambique’s foreign debt.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, those of us who have devoted ourselves all our lives to studying social issues will remember that the old manuals used to include a definition of social protection as a set of state protection measures to cover economically assessable risks affecting individuals or families which individuals – family units – could not cover themselves. Health is, of course, one of the assets that we as individuals most value, though very often when we have lost or risk losing it. It is, moreover, a fact that social systems – protection systems – have been suffering from the influences and consequences of economic, demographic and public health situations, etc. And it is also a fact that economic recession, unemployment, social exclusion, the appearance of new diseases, the ageing of the population, as well as advances in research, improved therapies, the development of new techniques of diagnosis and treatment have all had a profound effect on the levels of mandatory social and health cover. It is a proven and verifiable fact that Europeans are being protected against the risks of illness, maternity or old age (and there are more risks associated with old age these days because of the ageing of the population) not just by the essential and mandatory social and state schemes of social security or social protection. Articles 34 and 35 of our fledgling European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights recognise and respect the entitlement to social security benefits and social services and, at the same time, proclaim the entitlement of everyone residing and moving legally within the Union to social security benefits and social advantages in accordance with Community law and national laws and practices. Complementary private health insurance, whether voluntary or not, coexists with the mandatory public system and can be a way to achieve quality health care within a given time. I therefore believe we should lend our support to what Mr Rocard has put in his report – and we congratulate him on it – asking the Commission to provide a service, a Green Paper which will enable us to see the current insurance situation in the Member States and also to define the future. IN THE CHAIR: MR PROVANVice-President

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, having heard such ambitious and important statements in the area of foreign policy and employment policy, I am almost ashamed at having to express something in the nature of regret. But I must do so nonetheless. I have read your programme of work and I have listened to you very carefully. I can only wish that there were as much ambition in the areas on which I work here in the European Parliament, in the areas of environmental policy, consumer protection and health policy, as there is in the others. I understand that a presidency cannot work everywhere and be ambitious everywhere at once, and I respect the fact that you have placed the focus elsewhere. Nonetheless, I cannot let you get away with it so easily, as I am sure you will understand, and I should like to make a few comments on this. You have set great store in your written programme and in what you have said today on food safety. I think that is important. Parliament will be dealing with the White Paper on food safety. The Minister pointed out that the summit in June will address this White Paper. I hope that you have sufficient respect for the European Parliament to wait for Parliament to debate the issue and adopt its resolutions and I doubt that this will be the case by June. We shall, of course, gladly try to do so in order to accommodate the Portuguese Council Presidency. You also set great store by the water framework directive. Here too I ask you: if you would only accept the proposed amendments which Parliament will be adopting at the beginning of February, then we will be well on the way to agreement. Allow me to say something else. You mentioned that you want to link environmental policy with regional planning. I support you in that with all my heart. You have the opportunity to ensure at the Intergovernmental Conference that the new Treaty gives Europe powers in regional planning. Then you will have us on your side straight away. But will you implement it? I doubt it. However, I shall support you nevertheless. Finally, I should like to say this to you. Please take care to ensure in the areas of environmental policy and integration in other policy areas that an undertaking to do this is given and proven. Please pass this on to your colleagues in the Member States and please ensure that the legislation is transposed. That is not always the case with environmental legislation. And if you do that, then, although you have perhaps not announced as much as others, you will have done your job properly and I wish you the best of luck with it.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I celebrate the fact that this report brings nearer the prospect of safer car fronts and therefore fewer pedestrian, cyclist and motorcyclist deaths. Cars remain excessively and unnecessarily dangerous. Safer car fronts could save 2 000 lives a year at a cost of only EUR 30 or GBP 20 a car. I agree it should be possible to turn off daytime running lights. Indeed, I would want them banned in the United Kingdom because I think they reduce the visibility of motorbikes and make motorists feel superior and invulnerable. I am delighted at the ban on bullbars, not only when cars are sold, but also an as after-sales purchase. May I congratulate not only the rapporteur, but also my own colleague, Hermann Vermeer, for his excellent work in leading the search for a compromise and breaking the early deadlock between the two sides of the House, one insisting that voluntary agreements should never have a role, and the other saying that legislation should never have a role. I regret the attempt by the car industry lobby to discredit the EEVC tests. The report properly reminds us that EEVC is the institution which is at the forefront of research in road safety, with wide experience in the field of pedestrian protection in particular. While the EEVC and other test methods should continue to develop with new technologies, currently there are no equivalent tests, so those tests are for the moment standard. Just as I do not think that it is useful to be theological about voluntary agreements or legislation, nor do I think that it is useful to be theological about a particular kind of test, but there are no different standards at the moment.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Iran is a large and important country with an ancient tradition of culture and learning going back to the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian period. It is also a country with which the West has had troubled relations over a number of years. In rejecting Western consumerist values, Iran radicalised itself and supported radical Islamic groups in Lebanon, such as Hizbollah. There is added complexity because the conflicts with the West have long been bound up with internal disagreements within Iran itself. Recent years have seen a growing awareness within Iran that this isolation was harmful to Iranian interests and leading nowhere. The result has been a thaw in relations which we should welcome in the EU. Our relations will depend on fundamental progress in the areas of human rights and illegal immigration, weapons of mass destruction, in particular the country's nuclear weapons programme, drugs, the Middle East, Afghanistan and the battle against terrorism. With regard to drug trafficking, the Iranians, who have a very serious drug problem of their own, should be commended for their efforts and cooperation. They have also resisted the temptation to destabilise Afghanistan and have indicated they will not attempt to foment instability in Iraq in the event of Saddam Hussein's departure from the scene. Iran needs regional stability, and this has been recognised by the Iranian leadership. On the Middle East, Iran has joined Saudi Arabia in accepting the principle of 'land for peace', if that is what the Palestinians want. All of these developments are important and very welcome. Iran needs to understand that Europe is extending the hand of friendship and that ways can be found to live together without Iran losing either its identity or its opposition to the worst of Western values. It would be wrong for the European Union to overstress the issue of capital punishment per se, which remains legal, if used appropriately, in international law. It is practised in the world's largest democracies such as the USA, Japan and India and is supported by tens of millions of citizens in my country, the UK. Iran's leaders, however, should be in no doubt about the universal horror felt by us about the barbaric and medieval Sharia punishment of stoning to death. I urge the Iranian leadership to reflect on this and to find solutions commensurate with Iran's dignity and history.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, you are holding my nightlife to ransom! However, as it is for a good cause, I accept.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Yesterday afternoon, Mr Mario Mauro, my Italian colleague from the , organised a meeting on the future of the Internet. I had already prepared the explanation of my vote for the motion, but I altered it after taking part in his meeting, which, moreover, was extremely interesting, as his meetings always are. However, half way through the meeting, Mr President, Mr Mauro used an example. He said: 'You see, the Internet is a tool, not an end in itself. For example, here is a glass. Can you see this glass? It is to be used for drinking. If, however, I pick it up and smash it over Mr Fatuzzo's head,' – this is exactly what he said – 'Mr Fatuzzo's head will be in pieces and the glass will not have been used for drinking'. He used this example to explain that the Internet must be used properly, not abused. I agree with him for, apart from anything else, it is not difficult to realise that if I had not voted for the motion 636 glasses would have been smashed over my head.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Italy currently holds the Presidency of the Council, and a distinguished Italian, Mr Prodi, is President of the Commission. Consequently my first words must surely be words of condolence to the Italian people following the tragic events of recent days. I should like to turn now to a subject Mr Prodi dwelt on at length, namely the issue of controls. In modern organisations it falls to the administration of political power or of legislative power to exercise control. Mr Baron, leader of the Group of the , referred earlier to the Casaca report on the importance of Parliament as a source of political power. There are also the legislative controls. As Mr Baron said previously, duplication of administrative controls must be prevented. Administrative controls have their place within administration. I do not believe, however, that the outstanding issues before us today can ever be adequately dealt with without an ordered system of political and legislative control. Secondly, the Commission’s legislative programme focuses on enlargement. In this connection I am bound to reflect the very grave concerns felt by this House following the Commission’s latest monitoring report presented by Mr Verheugen in plenary. We wonder how many of the acceding countries really are in a position to transpose the Community acquis between now and 1 May. In the event of one or more of these countries failing to fulfil the relevant requirements, we wonder too what measures the Commission intends to propose and what measures the Council intends to adopt to prevent such countries joining the Community. I also have to say that this House was taken aback by the Latvian Government’s decision to relieve one of its members of the duty of observer at the European Parliament, because the member concerned had expressed opinions at variance with the official government line. This is all linked to the issue of minority populations in the Baltic States. The question arises as to whether these countries are meeting the fundamental Copenhagen criterion of having an open and functioning democratic system in place. The legislative programme also contains a reference to the Union’s new neighbours. In particular, there is a suggestion of creating common areas for matters of justice and home affairs together with Russia and Ukraine. I would remind you of recent events in those countries. Leaders of industry have been arrested, imprisoned and tried. It seems likely that this was done for political reasons, not for strictly legal ones. One might well wonder how much we could have in common with governments of that ilk. Finally, I should like to raise an issue touched upon by Mr Clegg and Mr van den Berg amongst others. I refer to the adoption of the interinstitutional agreement. I note that the President failed to refer to this agreement in any way. Though it is recent, this agreement is of major importance. It would be appropriate for the Commission to provide the House with some information on the implications of this agreement for the Commission’s legislative programme.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to underline what my colleague Mr Hernández Mollar has just said. This fight against discrimination is a fight that mobilises us all and it cannot be an exclusive banner for any political group in this Parliament. Article 13 of the Treaty of Amsterdam threw up a challenge for the European Union agenda, which gave the Community specific powers to initiate a variety of actions to combat discrimination, so as to ensure the same level of protection for all disadvantaged groups. I should like to congratulate the Commission on the important step it has taken in initiating this process of implementing Article 13 through the package of proposals that it has presented to combat discrimination. Experience has also shown us that the promotion of anti-discrimination legislation is essential but it is not enough. Such measures must be accompanied by preventive work and efforts to change behaviour and attitudes. Clear proof of this comes from the results of a fairly recent Eurobarometer survey, which showed that one in three Europeans, roughly 33%, regarded themselves as very or fairly racist. It is crucial that we teach and promote respect for multicultural diversity in Europe. I should also like to stress the importance of involving the countries applying for membership as much as we can in these Community actions to combat discrimination.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this Parliament has always upheld its commitment to the Guatemalan peace process ever since the signing of the 1996 peace accords, at which this Parliament was represented, just as we have repeatedly reiterated our intention and desire for national reconciliation in Guatemala, without this meaning the rule of impunity. The joint resolution we have tabled, resulting from the unanimous agreement of all the political groups in this Parliament, underlines the homogeneous and consistent position of this House, which has for so long been committed to human rights in general and the Guatemalan people in their search for peace in particular. The recent court sentences, such as the one that has been mentioned regarding the murder of Bishop Gerardi, have revealed just how important it is that justice and the rule of law should take their usual course and function normally, as in any democratic system, but we must not forget or stand in the way of the changes and pressures that have arisen in this process. We must show our concern for the situation of violence, involving assaults on individuals and members of the judiciary, that has occurred and which has, of course, caused turmoil. The rationale of wounds kept open for a long time is in any case unjustifiable, and the sooner a stop can be put to this the sooner Guatemala can move towards democracy, respect for the rule of law, development, peace and social improvement, leading to prosperity and the creation of the climate of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect that we so strongly desire for Central America and Guatemala. We are not in favour of supporting Mrs Frassoni’s amendment to take concrete action against military commanders. In our opinion the indiscriminate nature of this amendment is not good. Moreover, we would be taking over the role that belongs to the courts, whom we want to support in their vital task of pacification and re-establishing the rule of law.

Political group: PPE-DE
It would be arrogance to attempt to sum up the Copenhagen Summit in two minutes. I will therefore limit myself to a few points. First and foremost, I would like congratulate the Danish Presidency – and these congratulations are not just formal, they come from the heart – on the skill with which it has brought lengthy negotiations to a successful close. Secondly, we are witnessing an historic period of history, the full meaning of which we may not yet have grasped: for the first time in the history of mankind, a union of States is being built on the basis of a project of civilisation and shared values without recourse to military force. This means that we, the European Parliament, and the Council and the Commission, must evaluate very carefully something which President Prodi mentioned, namely the fact that, at this juncture, now Europe has been built, we need to make the rules. The rules of our founding fathers, the rules which were the basis for the development of the European Economic Community, now need very careful revision, revision which I am sure will be achieved by the Convention but which needs a further contribution. I would like to quote a statesman who lived two centuries ago in Italy – Count Camillo Benso di Cavour – who said. ‘We have made Italy, now we must make Italians!’ We have certainly made Europe at Copenhagen – now we have to make Europeans. And to make Europeans we need this large-scale information campaign promoting Europe – which our President mentioned this morning – which has been announced many times but will have to be implemented practically in the coming months, for what is happening here must be by common agreement between all our fellow European citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I feel that the question posed by my fellow Member Monica Frassoni is extremely pertinent. I would like to comment on this subject as I live in a border zone myself. I live in Perpignan, in North Catalonia. You will recall the problems imports from Spain caused at the border. The farmers held up the lorries and their contents were dumped on the road. I fear that this hydrological plan might lead to unfair competition for the farmers of Roussillon in particular, and also for the whole of the Midi region of France. I am afraid there might be further countryside revolts. In addition, the farmers will not understand it if this hydrological plan entails diverting the waters of the Rhône.

Political group: Verts-ALE
This directive alters the very definition of chocolate which should, in our opinion, be made from cocoa butter and beans. We do not have the right to mislead the consumer by using the name ‘chocolate’ to designate products which are not necessarily made from cocoa. Consumers require clear and specific information. They should no longer be deceived. Today’s vote went beyond the problem of chocolate alone and has threatened the confidence of our fellow citizens. This is why I voted for all the amendments which aimed to improve this directive and which were tabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy.

Political group: PSE