GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, people throughout Europe will react with disbelief and anger to the statement that there is no reason for anxiety in relation to depleted uranium weapons. It is tendentious to quote the Euratom Commission which exists explicitly to promote nuclear technology and whose radiation safety levels were originally set to allow atmospheric testing in the 1950s. Thankfully we have done away with that. Their anger is justified and is rising at the moment, because even low levels of alpha radiation can have a severe effect on children. We know from testing that there are molecules of plutonium in these weapons that are isolated but can have an extremely severe effect when ingested. Samples from six civilians near bombing targets in Afghanistan tested 100 times the normal level of uranium - contamination that stemmed from depleted uranium. Afghan doctors have cited deaths from internal ailments such as haemorrhaging, pulmonary constriction and vomiting, which are all effects of radiation contamination. During the Gulf War, allied troops admitted using over 300 tonnes of depleted uranium. These are suspected to be a prime factor in the epidemic of birth defects, leukaemias and cancers in Iraq. There is a difference between wet ground such as in Bosnia and desert conditions such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is extremely serious. I beg you not to have these children's deaths on your conscience, Commissioner, but to react more humanly and more seriously to this really dreadful situation.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, I would be interested to know how we, or those who come after us, will speak about this problem in ten years’ time, whether we will have become wiser or not. I cannot answer that question today. One thing is certain: security of supply will be improved by more competition; we have always been clear about that. Even competition cannot do that without supply, however, which means, I believe, that security of supply, of natural gas in particular, will depend very much on a European foreign policy for energy, in other words diversification and security of supply through access to gas. Like many others, too, I also advocate proceeding gradually. I believe that, as with oil, the responsibility rests in the first instance with the companies. I imagine that in two years’ time there may be a review and we may be rethinking the present situation. I do not believe we are under any pressure of time.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, it is clear that the political situation in Kampuchea is calmer at this moment than it has ever been and it is equally clear that the country is still a long way from being a real democracy. Much support is still required on the slow road to democracy, and the local elections will be an extremely important moment in that process. The Kampuchean People’s Party, which controls the country, is an old-style Communist party, which means that it as a party is directly or indirectly involved in everything, in every sector, at every level in that country. Consequently, it is not surprising that the local elections should be considered a threat and that they have been repeatedly postponed. It is therefore essential that we continue to exert international pressure on the government to do everything possible to create a violence-free period before the elections and to reopen the procedure for voter registration. Voter registration is in the hands of the village headmen, who are appointed by the central committee of the Kampuchean People’s Party, and nothing is simpler than to give poll cards to those in favour of the government and withhold them from those opposed to it. Only last Monday, the leader of the opposition, the Member of Parliament, Sam Rainsy, had a meeting with the local representative of the European Commission, who in that conversation, was able to make the point that we have a very positive attitude to the National Election Committee. I am far from being so enthusiastic. We must watch that National Election Committee very closely, since it is at the crux of whether or not the elections are being conducted fairly. The European Union has little cause to be proud of the way in which we observed the elections in Kampuchea last time, and we must do a lot better this time.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Commissioner, I do not have as many misgivings as some of my fellow MEPs. I believe that, on the whole, things are going well. We still have a few months left. Ordinary consumers and small businesses are not great planners, and the information will only strike home once they realise that things are getting serious and that it is high time they did something about it. Of course, we could lend them a helping hand, and I have two suggestions in that respect. As far as the SMEs are concerned, they should be given incentives in order to be ready on time. So far, there are a great many small and medium-sized businesses, especially those working for the local market, who can only see the drawbacks. They need to invest in order to be able to work with the euro, but they are not gaining any direct benefits. My question is whether it would not be possible for the Commission to encourage the Member States by, for example, offering SMEs small fiscal incentives to be prepared in good time. It is also important to make the consumer fully conversant with the fact that coins are not exchangeable in every Member State. Foreign coins must be spent, and it is vital for people to know this before the summer. So I would advise you to give them plenty of warning about this. Secondly, could I suggest that you take the initiative of collecting all coins locally and maybe using them for a good cause? That is better than simply binning them.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, we in the Group of the European People’s Party support the proposals of Mr Karas and the Commission. When it comes to economic and employment policy in the European Union, the hour of truth is drawing ever nearer. The demands and the objectives from Lisbon and Gothenburg must now become reality. Simplification is more important than streamlining. Increased participation, increased openness and increased transparency are important. For us , it is also important to assert that we are in favour of a social, ecological and ethically based market economy in Europe. It must be people-friendly. It must be family-friendly. It must provide room for personal, responsible creativity and also for security and initiative. Open coordination does not stand for standardisation but instead allows Member States, within the framework of close co-operation, still to find the solutions which are best for each individual country. It is important that the environmental objective from Gothenburg be combined with the economic growth requirement and social cohesion to achieve the three dimensions. We regret that the Commission has not included this in its communication. As let us also emphasise that trust as well as ethical and moral values are fundamental to social and economic development. If the economy lacks trust and an ethical and moral base, it cannot be developed. The European Parliament must achieve greater participation without necessarily demanding the right to make decisions. It is about giving the European Parliament not only the right to be present but also time. To conclude, I would like to say that it is important that the candidate countries take part in this work soon and that the regional and local authorities also be given an active role to play.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the proposal that the Commission is putting forward is to be welcomed but needs improving. I shall highlight three aspects in this regard: the first is that there is no sense in the rigidity that the draft regulation imposes regarding the percentage of the funding to be allocated to each type of measure. What would make sense would be to allow each Member State the flexibility, within the overall envelope, to allocate these funds according to its own needs, with clear rules. For instance, in the case of Portugal, funds for destroying vessels should be reduced and funds for restructuring some of these ships and for the social part should be increased. Secondly, an envelope of this kind should also include funding for the economic conversion of the areas most affected by fishing, and include in this compensation framework collateral activities such as the processing industry. This would mean, right from the outset, that the financial envelope would need reinforcing, which unfortunately has not happened in this proposal by the Commission, which even so is arguing about certain problems of budgetary procedure. The third aspect I should like to highlight is that, in the Commission’s view, the aim of this aid is essentially to close a chapter in the common fisheries policy, which was the agreement with Morocco, without making the effort which I believe was needed to expand the fishing possibilities for these countries in third countries’ waters, and without duly providing for measures, which again were needed, to help these companies become more international more easily. The Committee on Fisheries has tabled some amendments, and I should like to pay tribute to the rapporteur, who has made such an effort in this process. We, ourselves, have also tried to do our part with amendments that will clearly improve this proposal where it has gaps. As Mrs Fraga Estévez said, since there was no political ability to negotiate at the right time, I hope that there will now be dignity in the answers we are going to give to the fishermen affected. I also hope that this House will approve the proposal by the Committee on Fisheries and that the Council will do the job it has to do.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, last April, when we received Commander Ahmad Shah Massoud in this Chamber, he told us that the fall of the Taliban regime was inevitable given that the Pakistani government would find itself unable to provide it with any political and, in particular, military aid. All that Massoud asked of the international community and the European Union was to exercise effective diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to stop it from interfering in any way in the domestic affairs of Afghanistan. He was counting on his awareness of the Afghan people's exasperation with the Taliban when he predicted that it would rebel, including in the largely Pashtun southern territories. He assured us that he had set up an Alliance network throughout the country that would guarantee the establishment of a broad-based government of national unity. The speed of events over the past 48 hours has surprised only those of our learned experts who, without ever having been on the ground, professed that the anti-Taliban Alliance was made up only of a bunch of warlords who were just as barbaric as the Taliban themselves, and even more dangerous because inspired only by a hunger for power that would inevitably trigger new quarrels among themselves. Echoing the anxiety shown in Islamabad, these same experts, totally certain they are right, are still spreading the word via the media that the Northern Alliance represents only a very small percentage of the opinion of the Afghan people, who are supposedly still attached to the peace that only the Taliban have managed to bring them. The jubilant popular demonstrations in Kabul, the rebellion now underway in Kandahar itself, the signs of the return of thousands of refugees suffice to show that these prophets of doom were misled. The Members of this Chamber who had the intelligence to listen to Massoud will certainly rejoice. Yes, the situation remains politically fragile. It is up to the international community, and within it the European Union, to help establish this united government, which the former king, Zahir Shah, is willing to support. Yes, we must also give the Afghan people all the material aid it needs to recover from a disastrous humanitarian situation, in which, as Mr Wurtz said, we fear for the survival of 1.5 million Afghans who are at risk of famine and for the health of more than 6 million who are now at risk of serious malnutrition. We hoped that the Council and the Commission would be prepared to give undertakings along these lines without delay. I thank the President-in-Office of the Council and the Commissioner for confirming this.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Council has requested that urgent procedure be applied when it comes to special restrictive measures aimed at certain persons in terms of what is referred to as the fight against terrorism. The Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs has an extra meeting this evening. I hope that account will also be taken of the fact that some of us in the Confederal Group of the have asked a number of victims of this terrorist legislation in the European Union to come here to the European Parliament on Wednesday, both for a press conference and a round-table conference. There are three of them: Swedish citizens who have ended up in a rat trap. This is a huge legal scandal, at least in my view and that of many others. In this connection, I would also say how genuinely sorry I am that the Council is unwilling to be represented at this round-table conference. I think it is downright disgraceful, given that these are in actual fact people who are not in a position to defend themselves. They have not even been charged with any offence, yet all their financial assets have been frozen.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, on 25 November the procedures were adhered to in a formal sense, but everyone is well aware that there is a deterioration in the Community spirit. There are passages in force that are admissions of weakness and the oxygen of confidence has become scarce in the European Union since that day. We do not have sanctions, but the obligation to reduce deficits remains. Indeed, one of the Council’s conclusions highlights this. We must therefore save what may be left of the Pact today, in other words its spirit, the quest for stability and growth, using the one to achieve the other. What has happened also raises the question of the Franco-German relationship. It is not a question of its necessity as regards moving Europe forward but its credibility in ensuring that the steps forward are accepted. The Franco-German relationship is a driving force, but this driving force must not turn into a detonator that would cause Europe to explode. (Applause)

Political group: ELDR
This consultation procedure, which aims to amend Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, may seem unimportant. That, however, is not the case. There is in fact a relationship here between Community trade marks and designations of origin or geographical indications, which brings to mind the case of Limiano cheese, from Ponte de Lima, and even the question of wines. That is why Amendments Nos 1 and 2 in this report are dangerous. Although he states that a commercial trade mark may in no event be at the same time a geographical indication or designation of origin, the rapporteur also says that the indication or designation may be included in the trademark when the products covered have the right to bear it. The problem with this is that it may lead to trade protection for trade marks belonging to a titular holder, usually a company, thus threatening the designation of origin, as in the case of Limiano cheese. That is why we abstained from the vote. - Report Kirkhope (A5-0291/2003)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I too will try to help in this miracle “timesharing” between the panel of Commissioners and MEPs. Mr Vitorino, you know perfectly well that we share your concerns, the work that you personally have explained to the Committee on Freedoms, the scoreboard and the priorities that the Commission has set for all these issues. We are working on it in this Committee. Clearly, circumstances such as those I mention in the question I have put to you must give any European citizen, and especially those for whom we are responsible, an acquired political obligation. We are working doggedly on these issues, and asking for the greatest effort to speed up the work, so that none of the situations I have mentioned, like the expulsion of immigrants, can ever happen again, because this makes us ashamed to be Europeans and even more so to be those politically responsible.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the debate on the flood disasters has shown Europe to the public in a new light – as a community of solidarity. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a bonus that we should not carelessly fritter away. Great changes and challenges are ahead of us. The crucial issues are evident – to us, but not to the European public. The man in the street in Vienna would say that there is something missing from our information policy. It is precisely on this area that a large number of amendments have been submitted. The pressure to inform is huge, and that information must be one-sided – glossy brochures, ivory-tower conferences and websites – no matter how inventive, brilliantly conceived and really informative. It reminds me of something I frequently experienced in my professional life. If the public don't come to the theatre, the theatre must go to the public. We have to go out to people, to universities, into schools, and the Member States cannot be discharged from their obligations in this respect. We are all open to that criticism. We should inform each other better, as the lack of information gives rise to misunderstandings, and it is precisely those that we have least need of. That brings me back to cultural policy. You always hear it said, in a cynical tone, that in Brussels there is money lying all over the streets, and you just have to pick some up. Well, when it comes to culture, you can't talk in terms of collecting money and certainly not of just picking it up – counting the pennies is more like it. Bureaucracy in this area is simply unmanageable. Although we have only limited competence in it, I wonder what became of the three institutions' will to do something about cultural policy. It is far too weak. Rather than promote European content in this globalised age in which we live, we are supporting the big boys – big countries, big co-productions. That way, the little guys, the smaller countries, and the lesser-used languages lose out. What I want to ask the Commission is this: a legal basis for the financing of the A-30 lines is being planned, but what conception does the Commission have of it? Is there to be a multi-annual plan? Is there to be an interinstitutional working party, in order that the criteria in the individual areas can be defined jointly and more exactly?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Mr Perry has drafted a report and has presented certain elements of the Lloyd’s case to us. The Commissioner has given us a series of enlightening explanations today which are indeed valuable. And Mr Cashman contests Mr Perry's information. What emerges from this? That our concern at this moment in time is not the substance of the matter, nor are we a court. Our concern at this moment in time is this, and only this: after five years of reports, we want to maintain the credibility of our committee and, consequently, our problem is whether we shall receive a definitive answer as to the extent to which the directive was or was not applied. That is our only concern. I am seizing this opportunity to generalise this concern, because today we had the reports from the Ombudsman and the Committee on Petitions. The Lloyd’s issue came to the Committee on Petitions with petitions from citizens. The Ombudsman was also involved, as the Commissioner said, in the issue of the extent to which the Commission did its job properly. And, of course, it is a question of the application of Community law. What emerges from this? That the two twin rights, of accusation and petition, are interlinked. They should not therefore be debated separately. Secondly, with these two reports, the whole issue of the proper application of Community law is involved; in other words, the extent to which this report should also be jointly debated today. I therefore propose to Parliament, the Commission and my honourable friends that we look at the possibility of examining these reports jointly because, materially, they are the only reports which directly concern the European citizen. As, therefore, we are all interested in reinforcing the participation of the European citizen, I think we should give some emphasis to this debate and I even think that we should declare the day of the debate in Parliament to be the day of the European citizen. Thus, we shall be reliable and we shall say that we really are interested in their rights. Now, what we are calling for, after five years, is a clear picture at least of what is going on. So what we want is to obtain this clear picture in a short space of time because Mr Cashman may in fact be right. However, we do not know at this moment who is right. And the Commission has indeed been neglectful. Thus, I shall raise the more general concern. The Committee on Petitions often delays its final conclusions because we have a time-consuming procedure on the part of the Commission on the question of petitions. Could it not shorten this period of time so that we too are more credible in the eyes of the European citizens who come and say to us, it has been eighteen months and we have not had a reply? These are the more general concerns that are being aired in today's debate and I think it is a golden opportunity for us to use them in the interest, naturally, of the European Union, but more importantly, for us to give European citizens to understand that we stand by them.

Political group: PSE