GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, this report has won the consensus of a large majority in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. In my opinion, this is a significant confirmation of those shared Europeanist objectives that have, in the past, characterised the European Parliament in its relations with the other Community institutions, with national parliaments and public opinion. We have played – and we have shown that we wish to continue playing – an important part in supporting the process of European integration, and its continual and coherent development. The political tensions that characterised the start of this parliamentary term are therefore not obstructing the necessary agreements between various, important – the most important – parliamentary groups on the subject of consolidating the Union, its institutions and its policies. It is important to agree, at this time, on the proposal that must be drawn up on the reform of the Treaties, on the convening of the new Intergovernmental Conference and on the drawing up of the agenda and the method. The positions taken in the Dimitrakopoulos-Leinen report have been supported by those in the communications by President Prodi and Mr Barnier on behalf of the European Commission, explained to Parliament the day after the vote in our committee. This is now a sure point, which everyone must take into account: Parliament and the Commission are moving in the same direction and are equally convinced that the Intergovernmental Conference must not restrict itself to a limited horizon, simplified guidelines or a minimal agenda. The wide-ranging discussion in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs showed that Parliament is concerned with being, at the same time, far-sighted and realistic, demanding and practical. We should stop seeing Parliament as if it were advancing goodness knows what dangerous demands and impossible requests. Our proposals are not a reflection of an abstract scheme and are not a luxury, but reflect objective, inescapable requirements for a comprehensive reform of the institutions of the Union. We need to go beyond Amsterdam and look further in order to be able to realise the historic commitment to enlarging eastwards, and to guarantee further progress in the integration process that is working against the risks of dilution and stagnation. No one can overlook the problems of strengthening the political side of Europe and institutional change but, in addition to this, we have had to deal with the launch of the euro and the European Central Bank, the lesson to be learnt from Kosovo, the widespread aspiration for a guaranteed area of security and justice and the disenchantment of too many European voters. This is an appeal we are making, in particular, to governments and national parliaments, with whose assistance we must build a stronger, more united and more democratic Europe.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, when it comes to conflict prevention and crisis management, the leaders of most Member States and the European Union itself have not chalked up any successes, nor are they able to give many guarantees for the future. The tragic situation in the Balkans is, I think, proof of this. We say we are going to improve all this and let us hope that we do. Today, everything is completely cut and dried. We do not need any generalisations or insults nor do we need insinuation. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is threatened by a number of state or civil forces which refuse to acknowledge its definitive borders. It is that simple. And everything else stems from this, throwing FYROM’s very existence into doubt. So, if you want to prevent conflicts and manage the crisis which already exists, you should state very loudly that UN Resolution No 1244 applies to the letter. Ask KFOR to do its job throughout Kosovo, to control borders, to make arrests and to refer people to the courts, in liaison with the representatives of the UN. State, even more loudly, that the border agreement signed by Yugoslavia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on 24 February is valid and completely legal, that all neighbouring countries must abide by it to the letter and that this is a criterion for our relations with them and for the funds which you so proudly announced and which are totally inadequate.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I think the oral amendment replaces Amendment No 12 tabled by the , in which case, Amendment No 12 could be withdrawn. We therefore need to split the paragraph up into three parts for the vote. We could vote for the first part – ‘reasserts the necessity of a withdrawal of the military from political decision making’ – then we could vote against the second part – ‘the demilitarisation of society’ – but vote for the third part – ‘and the strengthening of the political institutions’. I think the different groups in the House will agree to this. The paragraph can therefore be split into three parts and we can vote for the first and third parts and against the second part, so that the phrase ‘the demilitarisation of society’ is deleted.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we are certainly in the same boat so to speak. Having left my house at 7 a.m. this morning I expected to be in Strasbourg at 4 p.m. However, we were subject to a 4-hour flight delay and were taken to Düsseldorf on route. I will not bore you with the details, but we finally arrived here. It has been very interesting listening to the Commissioner. Safeguards of nuclear materials are extremely important within and outside the European Union. Security of nuclear materials in the EU has been an increasingly important issue since 11 September. Unlike the Commissioner, I believe that the best way to safeguard nuclear materials is to stop production of them and a particular issue is the reprocessing of nuclear materials. We know that there are ground-to-air missiles at Cap de la Hague, and the defences of Sellafield remain a secret. It cannot be right, after 11 September, to continue to stockpile and increase the stockpile of hundreds of tonnes of plutonium.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam Commissioner: the broadly supports the Galileo project in principle. We recognise the case for a complementary and alternative satellite radio navigation system. We recognise the importance of maintaining European technological capability for space activity. We welcome the emphasis on a civil project intended ultimately to be commercially viable in a number of fields such as communications and Earth observation, as well as position – finding. The difficulty lies in determining how to fund a venture until it becomes self-financing, particularly in view of the large sums of upfront investments required. We want to see industry fully involved in the planning, specifications and preparatory stages to ensure a better chance of technical success. That is why we have reintroduced amendments to lower the entrance fee for business to be part of the Joint Undertaking. We see no particular merit in the proposal for a development company at this stage which duplicates the Joint Undertaking structures. We are mindful of the difficulties of funding such a large-value infrastructures project solely from the private sector, which is why we have put forward the amendment enabling some funding to come from defence budgets provided it is used only for peacekeeping purposes. This merely supports the comments made in Annex 1 of the Commission's own information note concerning strategic considerations. In closing I would say that it is a great pleasure to be here as the other half of 'les deux gilles ciel et espace' club, with my colleague, Mr Savary.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, President-in-Office of the Council, you have seen the extent to which the resolution tabled by Mr Daul represents the entire Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development in all its political hues. I believe that should be of concern to you, President-in-Office of the Council, at a time when the Brussels Council is deciding on enlargement, but when, at the same time, it is freezing the agriculture budget until 2013. We do not want to believe that what has been discussed, in particular with regard to the mid-term review, might be called into question and become obsolete, because the representatives of the Council have a variety of interests. President-in-Office of the Council, your comments have indeed been extremely soothing, but they will not suffice to anaesthetise us. When the Council speaks of rural development or sustainable development, this is clearly nothing more than rhetoric. If we really want to carry out rural development, you will have to tell us sooner or later when it will be possible to move from 10% funding to the 20% funding proposed by Commissioner Fischler and approved by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development as a whole. If we continue to be so vague, what does that mean? Will we in fact have the means to implement our policy if modulation is not restrictive? How, then, will we effectively be able to continue to carry out ecoconditionality, land-use planning, and address social issues? This will not be possible if you do not actually provide the means to implement this policy. Will we really be able to hold a proper debate and carry weight in the WTO as of 2003 if we cannot prove, for example to the developing countries, that the model Europe is creating is truly a model of multifunctionality that respects both mankind and the environment, and not a form of trade in disguise?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would firstly like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Adam, for his work. He has produced a wonderful report and, throughout its production, he has shown great skill in introducing all those aspects which could improve it and make it more flexible. As has already been said in this debate, the identification and traceability of goats is an essential element in the control of animal health and, also, of course, food safety. The problems of identification in this type of livestock are very significant; the movement of livestock which can take place within one year, which has an enormous influence on the problems of traceability, or the way in which the lives of this type of livestock are spent, which hinders adequate registration and identification by means of the current systems. We therefore believe that it is very important to establish a sufficiently long transitional period during which we can adopt flexible measures in order to reach a date, naturally, when the electronic identification becomes obligatory for all the countries of the European Union. It is very important that we understand that the additional cost of an electronic identification system must not be an additional cost which solely and exclusively falls to breeders, but which must be taken on by society as a whole, since it is society which will benefit from the implementation of such a system of traceability and identification as ambitious as the one being proposed to us.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to make two comments. The first is that our Committee on Employment and Social Affairs is extremely unhappy about the exceptionally short time span. Mrs Diamantopoulou has already pointed this out. You could almost say that it is undemocratic that the rapporteur from our committee has to provide a report as early as next week – this coming Friday, to be precise. We could go on to discuss it further, but, of course, time is much too short. The problem is serious enough as it is, but what is even worse is that it will be repeated next year, no doubt in a more serious form. On the subject of an open coordination method, I, too, along with a great many others, also wish to be taken seriously. Those procedures must therefore be changed in one way or another, in spite of all the mediation that has taken place in the meantime. Furthermore, I am afraid that two subjects are missing from the guidelines for employment, but we shall shortly be speaking about these further in our committees. The first is that we are concentrating too much and too emphatically on short-term problems in particular countries – which has just been mentioned. The second is the non-cyclical nature of these guidelines.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, will NEPAD be the tool of African renaissance when other plans have failed? The are perhaps the only ones who doubt it. Of course we support the human-rights aspect of NEPAD, though we regret the fact that it is often merely theoretical. We shall not linger here on the contempt, on the part of the authors of NEPAD, for any prior consultation of the people regarding the drawing up of the plan, and we would point out that repression of political opponents and journalists is still happening in Africa, even in Senegal. In economic terms, NEPAD promises the same liberalism as was created by the World Bank and the IMF, the liberalism of structural adjustment plans, the same liberalism which brought Argentina to its knees and which grapples with public services, health services, water-distribution services and education services, the liberalism which, in the final analysis, increases inequalities and poverty, in particular as they affect women. It is time to carry out an evaluation of the impact of earlier commercial liberalisation policies on social and economic development and on the protection of the environment. NEPAD is not short of freedoms, be it freedom of capital, free movement of goods or freedom to provide services. Yet what has happened to the free movement of workers within the Community of African States? What has happened to the freedom of peoples to choose their own future? Moreover, I should like to draw your attention to the gradual regionalisation for which NEPAD makes provision. There is a problem in that the European Union supports such zones, which are now tending to resemble scenarios in which the NEPAD instigating countries take neighbouring African countries under their political and economic wing. Nor will NEPAD be able to claim to be a viable solution while at the same time ignoring what is at stake as a result of the terrible burden of debt borne by the countries of Africa. Thus provision is made for reducing the debt only in the case of countries which have followed neo-liberal principles. The European Union should seek and apply the total and unconditional cancellation of the debt. Promoting sustainable development in Africa does not mean throwing that continent to the mercy of the multinationals and of foreign investments. It does not mean encouraging the exploitation of its resources by foreign powers. For example, the agricultural and mining sectors to which NEPAD gives priority will be totally dependent on prices that are fixed by the countries of the North. Africa is not for sale. Africa must be constructed by and for Africans.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner Byrne, the issue under discussion is the directive on the use of animal by-products. My view on this matter is, on the one hand, that of the producers and, on the other, that of a country with small volumes and long distances. Initially I want to say that Mrs Paulsen has done a thorough and good job. I would particularly like to thank her for also having taken into account the problems of less densely populated areas, which I represent, in Amendment No 69, in which local disposal is permitted in exceptional circumstances. My problem in relation to the proposal is why the precautions are identical for the entire area of the EU if the risks in some areas are non-existent. This will cause these areas unnecessary costs. Already now, for example, costs are greater for producers in the northern area due to natural conditions. I propose that instead of only following principles, we should combine them with common sense. In my country’s only animal waste plant different categories of waste can still be separated from each other, but separating waste from different species of animal seems extremely difficult as we are looking at such small volumes. Therefore, the goal of stopping cannibalism, good in itself, should be taken as a guideline and a common sense solution should be sought. After all, natural cannibalism does exist as a phenomenon in the animal kingdom. How will these kinds of animal be treated in the future? Directives do not prevent natural cannibalism in animals. Although we are now accepting Parliament’s opinion on the directive proposal, we still need to think about these things. Here I am not defending intensive farming but I would like to see the different conditions in different areas better taken into account.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, we are shocked by the murder of Archbishop Courtney, whom, in the five years that he was here in Strasbourg, we knew as a diplomat, pastor and also as a personal friend. I simply have to say that he was one of the truly great ecclesiastical figures in the tradition of the great Irish churchmen of the Middle Ages, who was always actively committed to the cause of peace and humanity; it was he who made it possible for us, here in Strasbourg, to join together in a service once a month, something he started along with a few of us in this House. I can still remember how Archbishop Courtney took his leave of us when he went to Burundi to actively involve himself in the peace process there. As soon as his aircraft landed there, it was shot at; there were rockets to welcome him. He then, in peril of his own life, spent five years participating in the peace process, drawing on the wide experience he had gained from his missions in trouble spots on four continents. He was meant to go to Cuba this week to take up office as papal Nuncio there and help human rights and freedom of religion to prevail. His mysterious, brutal and deliberate murder put a stop to that. We should honour his memory. He would certainly not, though, want his murder to be the only reason for us to focus on Burundi and thereby forget that murder is a daily occurrence in that country. In recent years, over 200 000 people have been murdered there, not because of what we term ethnic conflicts, but because of a deliberate policy of genocide, and the fact that the situation in nearby Rwanda is even worse, and that in its neighbours Uganda and the Congo no better, should not hide from us the fact that we have a special obligation to this region, tormented as it is by ethnic killings that know no borders. Europe does have obligations here, and our respect for Archbishop Courtney and for his legacy demands that we take appropriate action.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we are dealing here with amendments to a directive concerning the intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine. I would like to start by congratulating the rapporteur on his report and agreeing very strongly with the remarks he has just made. I suggested a single amendment during the committee stage of the debate, which was accepted by the committee, regarding the need for Member States to put in place a proper system of spot checks, inspections and controls to ensure the efficient implementation of these regulations. My amendment calls upon the Commission to monitor the Member States to see that they carry out the necessary inspections set out in these regulations, because if we are to mount a successful campaign to contain and eradicate tuberculosis and brucellosis, then the proper implementation of these regulations will be essential. May I also say that, sadly, these regulations are at the present time largely academic in respect of my own Member State because of course we have been banned from exporting live bovine animals from the UK for the past four years. Indeed, even the export of dead bovines is still being blocked in certain countries because although the ban on the export of beef from the UK was lifted on 1 August 1999, it is, as we all know, still being illegally maintained by France and Germany to this very day. In the case of the pig sector the export trade is also suffering because during the past two years the pig industry has experienced acute difficulties. Indeed in Scotland, my own country, we have witnessed a 25% reduction in the national herd in the past twelve months. Unless urgent action is taken by the UK Government, a further 25% will go within the next few months. Now, this appalling situation has been brought about by a combination of issues involving the strength of sterling, the gold-plating of welfare and hygiene standards, which have been imposed on the industry by the UK Government, and the extra costs arising out of the BSE crisis. These factors are driving UK pig farmers out of business as more and more cheap imports are sourced by retailers and supermarkets in the UK. Now it transpires that the situation could deteriorate even further as EU applicant countries from Central and Eastern Europe are projected to increase their net exports of pigmeat by nearly 300% by the year 2006. At the same time they will be seeking derogations from the EU to enable them to produce pork to welfare and hygiene standards that would be considered illegal under current EU law. If Britain is once again to reactivate a dynamic intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine, then immediate help is required to alleviate the catastrophic situation affecting rural Britain and affecting our pig and beef sectors in particular. I hope this message is getting through to the British Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Political group: PPE-DE
I would like to tell the Minister that I do not find his answer very satisfactory. What we are actually facing is the need to have a new association agreement that must come into force on 1 March 2000 and I am a little surprised that, at this stage, no decision has yet been taken on the three guidelines, on the three paths that have been sketched out. I would like to ask the Council how, when these paths are sketched out, it intends to link, as it were, Parliament with the definition of this new financial instrument, because there is no doubt that a new financial instrument will be needed because what exists at the moment is no longer suitable for the situation of the overseas countries and territories and does not match up to these countries’ requirements.

Political group: PSE