GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, please allow me to express here in this House – which I have considered my home for ten years – the horror I feel at the death and mutilation of innocent victims in Iraq. They all have names, just like you and me, and they are in no way mere statistics. I wish to express my anguish because, although victory is being claimed, we do not yet know how this disaster is going to end; and shame, because this Parliament has not been able to reflect the views of millions of Europeans who are speaking out against this war throughout Europe. I very much regret that this Parliament has not been able to draw up a resolution which says something very simple: ‘Stop the war. Stop the killing’. I would also like to express my horror at the fact that for some days we have seen the United States’ Government blatantly and obscenely distributing the booty in the form of profits from reconstruction. I think it is shameful that this Parliament has not even condemned this: this disgusting obscenity of the booty being distributed over the dead bodies not just of Iraqis but also of young British and American soldiers who are also losing their lives. Mr President, I had no choice but to express these feelings.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, due to a complaint from a customer in Maryland, who found Mediterranean fruit fly larvae in clementines, the United States took harsh unilateral measures with regard to Spain. In fact, as you know, it is not a plant health problem but a trade barrier that the United States has now established. It is true, as Mr Jové Peres stressed, that the Spanish Government lost time by failing to inform the Commission immediately and instead waited until 14 February to do so, despite the fact that the problem came to light in November 2001. But the problem exists and Morocco is also currently experiencing the same problem for the same reasons. The fly that bit the American Government, if I can put it like that, is more of an electioneering insect rather than a citrus fruit parasite from the Mediterranean. The attitude of the United States towards clementines is the same as it is towards steel products, as my fellow Members have already said. It marks a return to protectionist ways and to unilateralism with complete disregard for WTO obligations. The United States cannot carry on closing their borders when faced with the urgency of the elections or ignore the WTO agreements when the European Union poses them problems. Therefore, as recommended by the resolution, I call on the Commission to instigate proceedings at the WTO against the United States if an immediate solution to the situation is not found. Next, the Commission must present proposals to compensate the people affected, until the conflict is resolved. Lastly, the Council should inform us, through its President-in-Office of the Council, of the latest initiatives that it is taking to resolve this conflict.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Paragraph 31 of Mr Brok’s report on the common foreign and security policy highlights the following message: ‘[The European Parliament] stresses the need, for the democratic legitimacy of Russia, given its political union with Belarus, that Russia's president and government unequivocally reiterate the strong need for democratic reforms in Belarus, particularly in the light of the report delivered in Minsk on 16 October 2000 by the parliamentary troika from the European Union, the Council of Europe and the OSCE.’ I am the author of that amendment, backed by a broad majority of the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. Does Russia, in the long term, want to be in political union with a non-democratic régime? I also want specifically to name four people who have disappeared without trace in Belarus in the course of the years 1998-2000, together with a politician who died in obscure circumstances. These people are: Jurij Zaharenko, former Minister of the Interior and Vice-President of Belarus’s 13th Supreme Soviet; Victor Gonchar, Vice-President of Belarus’s 13th Supreme Soviet who is also presiding over a criminal investigation into President Lukatjenko; Mr Krasovskij, friend of Vice-President Gonchar, who has disappeared with him; Dmitrij Zavadskij, a film maker for Russian TV who disappeared in mysterious circumstances from Minsk Airport on 7 July of this year; and, finally, Jurij Karpenko, leader of the Civil Party and former Mayor of Molodechno, who died suddenly and in obscure circumstances in August 1999. I would ask Mr Patten and Mr Solana, together with the incoming Swedish Presidency, to take vigorous joint action against Belarus’s anti-democratic régime.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, solidarity with the victims of the atrocious attacks is the first emotion we expressed – and rightly so. But I welcome the fact that the Council and the Commission set to work at full tilt to formulate proposals. We now have globalisation of terrorism. Everyone is vulnerable. But we can also turn our vulnerable world into a safer world. That is the challenge. However, it requires multilateral cooperation in a global fight against terrorism. This is the positive element that I am trying to glean from the fact that Article 5 of the NATO Treaty has been invoked: that it is seen as a sign of solidarity. I am not in favour of a blank cheque for any old military action which would claim more innocent victims and would create resentment and frustrations. I would rather see an invitation to enter into consultation and dialogue across the oceans, even though there is the risk of it not being seen in that light. We should be aware that our people are anxious, that many people fear that we will simply be dragged along by a war machine. We should realise that we must explain what our intentions are. We must make this vulnerable world safer by providing political solutions to endless conflicts such as that in the Middle East. We must bring hope to large parts of the world that have to live in despair. Without a fair world order, stability and peace remain a distant dream, and there will always be a breeding ground for terrorism. We are delighted with the unanimous will that has been expressed over the past couple of days and that has been echoed by the Council and the Commission on this platform. We now look forward to action, rather than words, for as regards providing Europe with the resources to achieve these goals, some of our Member States have in the past persisted in throwing up barriers. How long have we been waiting for the cooperation necessary to turn Europol into an effective instrument? This was called for back at Amsterdam. According to Mr Vitorino, the extradition of terrorists is the cornerstone of the fight against terrorism. But it remains to be seen whether we can all agree. The President-in-Office of the Council listed various instruments for the prevention of terrorism, but will we ever succeed in monitoring the flow of capital which feeds terrorism worldwide? Will we ever want to, and be able to, exercise effective control over the arms trade? Or will the economic arguments prevail tomorrow once more over the arguments for security and prevention of terrorism? For terrorism exists, fanaticism exists, injustice exists. There are many weapons which terrorists have not yet used but which are at their disposal thanks to our technological society.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I must also applaud the splendid work done by Mr Söderman as European Ombudsman. I also want, however, to emphasise that Mr Posselt and Mr Liikanen have made an important point. We must have institutions that fight for citizens’ rights in the EU. We must have colleagues who show that they are in favour of securing citizens’ rights, but that is not enough in itself. It is our task to ensure that citizens are also given resources to campaign themselves for their own rights. It is our task to guarantee that the individual is not powerless before the institutions of the EU. That, moreover, is precisely the job of the European Ombudsman. It is therefore also our task in the European Parliament to ensure that the Ombudsman is given the opportunities and the tools that make for the right working conditions, including access to documents and the opportunity of talking with employees and obtaining clear answers. I would urge the Danish Presidency to make efforts along these lines in order to ensure that the European Ombudsman is able to operate as intended.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I would like to clarify a point. The final sentence of Amendment No 53 has not been superseded. It may therefore be put to the vote as an extension of Amendment No 69, which we have just voted on. The clause reads thus: ‘in particular by means of courses organised by the participating universities’. The President established that there were no objections to the oral amendment. (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0080/2003) by Mario Mauro, on behalf of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport, on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting a multi-annual programme (2004-2006) for the effective integration of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in education and training systems in Europe (eLearning Programme) (COM(2002) 751 – C5-0630/2002 – 2002/0303(COD)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0084/2003) by Eva Klamt, on behalf of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, on the initiative by the Kingdom of Belgium with a view to the adoption of a Council Decision setting up a European network of national contact points for restorative justice (11621/2002 – C5-0467/2002 – 2002/0821(CNS)) Before the vote:

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, you mentioned a change to the Rules of Procedure in your response to Mr Fatuzzo. I would remind you that the role of court jester is an essential one! The parliamentary jester probably plays the same role, and perhaps we would be better off listening to him entertaining us rather than obsessing over matters of seats, which fuels populism more than you think.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the regulation on the transboundary movement of genetically modified organisms is a rather surreal document. Therefore, please will you forgive me my customary digression, for I cannot stop my flights of fancy. Yesterday, I met a GMO wandering about between borders, who said to me: ‘Why have you got it in for me so badly? Yesterday, while I was wandering between borders, I went to Naples. I saw the beautiful Gulf of Naples, Vesuvius and Mergellina. It was absolutely beautiful! Then, a little further on, still by the sea, I saw a horribly ugly, uninhabited area where there was a steelworks that had been deserted for 10 years. The area was called Bagnoli. Why do you not do something in Europe to enhance the environment in this area near Naples? There you are, you see, wandering from one place to another I have been useful: I have seen an area where you, as Europe, might be able to do something to enhance the environment. Why, then, have are you so against us GMOs? Even we have our uses. Are you sure you are aware of our full potential? Therefore, be more flexible in allowing the genetic modification of organisms which are useful to the human race.’

Political group: PPE-DE
I would like to hear from the Commission whether it can accept the amendments proposed by Parliament.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, as many of us know, last Friday saw the inauguration in Vienna of the Monitoring Centre for Racism, Xenophobia and Antisemitism. I would like to thank you for your forceful intervention. At this very important juncture, you said that racism, xenophobia and antisemitism are totally incompatible with the defence of human rights and the dignity of the human person. You stated this very clearly and powerfully and thus sent a message of confidence to the people of Austria and to all the other peoples of Europe. Many MEPs, representing almost all the Parliamentary groups and many of the Member States, were present, as of course were many Austrian MEPs and the President of the Committee on Citizens’ Rights, Graham Watson. They all asked me – and I am very willing to act as their messenger – to thank you for your speech, which made us proud to be Members of this House. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to begin by thanking the general rapporteur for his report. I must also make the Commission aware once again of the long-standing position of the Committee on External Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. I am glad Mr Garriga Polledo has also endorsed this position, inasmuch as we cannot continue financing new priorities to the detriment of other parts of the world such as TACIS, the Mediterranean, Latin America and Asia. This is simply not possible, Commissioner. I have in mind new commitments such as those made to Afghanistan and Iraq. I should like to run briefly through the priorities of the Committee on External Affairs. These are to combat poverty and promote human rights. The committee also shares the priorities of the European security strategy, namely combating terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and preventing organised crime and regional conflict, as well as dealing with failing states. I have noted with some concern the adjustments needed to bring the 2005 Budget into line with the requirements of the Financial Perspective. Commissioner, I trust the offer of cooperation you just extended to the Committee on Budgets and to the Presidency-in-Office of the Council can also be extended to the Committee on External Affairs, as we are all working together in the interests of effective and visible European external action.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, given the threat of invasion, this is no laughing matter. We need to address it in association with the Commission and the Council, bearing in mind that the fifteen Member States have ratified the Treaty on the International Criminal Court. This matter therefore merits serious treatment and my group would also like to call for this matter to be discussed at the next plenary in July, together with the respective statements by the Council and the Commission.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the strongly welcomes the report for not simply revisiting existing powers to improve clarity but for boldly seeking to adjust competences to face the challenges that the Union knows, especially in the foreign and security field. The report will serve as the first contribution to the Convention on the question of competences. I trust that the Convention will follow the wise approach in rejecting the rigid and misleading concept of exclusive competences and in focusing instead on developing a more sophisticated system of power sharing. My group supports the idea of creating a new judicial procedure of constitutional complaint for breaches of competency, which implies the rapid evolution of the European Court. The procedure would be rarely deployed, but it represents a significant insurance scheme to see that the Union authorities do not abuse their reinforced powers. A further area deserving of greater focus concerns the regions, which can be, and should be, useful intermediaries between the citizen on the one hand and the supranational authorities on the other. We are proposing amendments which will strengthen the report in this respect.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, I heartily support the Council’s attempts to promote the safety of sea transport in the International Maritime Organisation. It is important to ensure that if dangerous vessels such as these which do not meet the required standards are banned from European territorial waters they do not then move on to a third country’s territorial waters and cause problems there. It is important to move forward via the international community. My question, however, actually concerns whether it would be possible to raise this issue of fuel shipments, particularly in the Baltic, at the next EU–Russia summit. It is vital that such matters be given the highest possible profile and, in my opinion, this is such an important question that it should be taken up at the highest political level with the Russian leadership. Is this possible?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Seppänen, on his report, which is so useful in the general context of the debate on Turkey’s accession to the Union. Here we are talking about establishing a special programme to consolidate the Customs Union, extending the mandate of the European Investment Bank so that it can cover new loans to Turkey in the 2000-2004 period amounting to EUR 450 million. The report was unanimously adopted by the Committee on Budgets. Given that this special programme of EUR 450 million, of which the European Union is guaranteeing 65%, specifies that at a provisioning rate of 9 % only EUR 26 million will have to be transferred from the reserve to the Guarantee Fund, there will only be a budgetary impact in the event of a default, because in that case the guarantee would have to be called in. With these loans from the European Investment Bank we are supporting investment in Turkish industry and in its infrastructures in terms of transport, energy and telecommunications. All this is in order to increase Turkey’s competitiveness within the Customs Union and thus reduce the negative impact that the dismantling of trade barriers is having on the Turkish economy. The fundamental issue regarding Turkey is not, therefore, considered in the Committee on Budgets, and this must be very clear. The fundamental issue of Turkey’s accession continues to be a political issue and it is the responsibility of other parliamentary committees. Customs Union and the loans from the European Investment Bank have been operating with Turkey for many years. The aim now is to give the boost that is needed towards future accession. I repeat that the only serious problems that we could have would occur if the macro-financial aid promised reached the maximum amount established, as in this hypothesis the residual reserve for guarantees would be reduced to practically zero for 2001 and 2002. Let us remember that it is in the interests of the European Union to fund nuclear safety projects in third countries in the framework of Euratom. A zero level of residual reserve could lead to definite problems in funding those investments. The general situation that the report sets out is part of a situation of Parliament/Council negotiation for the 2001 budget, in which the European Parliament wishes to extend its rights to information and consultation in the case of external commitments by the Union that have a financial impact. This is the position that the Group of the Europe People’s Party advocates and that Parliament adopted at first reading. Let us hope that it leads to tripartite dialogue and conciliation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, enlargement of the EU is an important step, and the right one, on the road that leads to Europe's future, but this is not a time for unmitigated jubilation. On the contrary, the enlargement process needs to be carefully prepared and negotiated, both as a whole and even more so in all its many details, so that they too, being the proverbial lair of the devil, may be right. It is important from that point of view that Parliament have an associated debate to thrash out enlargement as a whole – the progress of the accession negotiations, financial issues and, last but not least, Community action for the border regions. It is this topic that numerous Austrian MEPs have, for five years and initially in the teeth of virtually universal opposition, repeatedly highlighted as an indispensable back-up measure, and they have done so for very good reasons. Now that the date for accession is looming ever closer and more and more people are giving thought to what this event will actually amount to in detail, we can scarcely restrain ourselves from indicating our agreement. To be sure, most are not only willing to agree with us, but they also, and above all, want a share in the financial resources and to share them with us. As has already been said today with reference to support for border regions, the Commission was not particularly helpful at the outset. Even now, we are not completely satisfied with the communication from the Commission. What is being provided for should be welcomed as an initial measure, but there will be a need for further steps – for which read funds – to make a wholesale success of enlargement on our side of the border as well. There will also be a need for a number of other back-up measures. Above all, we need a better de minimis rule, to give additional support, in the form of European subsidies, to the efforts of our Member States and regions at restructuring using their own resources. Only when that happens will people in the region immediately adjoining the border be able to say ‘yes’ to enlargement with a clear conscience.

Political group: PPE-DE
Japan is now experiencing a recession. The United States are not far behind, Europe is seeing considerably less growth and a recession is not completely out of the question. In order to prevent a global recession, it makes perfect sense to boost economic activity by means of coordinated action with Japan and the United States, through increasing public expenditure up to a limit of 3% of the public deficit of each EU Member State, on the condition that: - the purpose of increasing expenditure is to improve public investment and to encourage private investment; and - at the same time, efforts are redoubled to implement structural reforms that stimulate employment, investment and competitiveness. The Stability and Growth Programme must, therefore, be made more flexible, in addition to the flexibility resulting from ‘automatic stabilisation’, and this is why I abstained on the motion for a resolution tabled by the Group. – Hieronymi Report (A5-0286/2001)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I, too, wish to say that I welcome the report and that I join in the congratulations accorded to the rapporteur, Mr Mastorakis. I should also like to say to the Commissioner, loudly and clearly, ‘do not be afraid to show ambition’. The evidence is there for all to see that this is a problem of European dimensions. We are not only talking about the Prestige or the Erika; we are talking about the thousands of ships that year after year pollute European waters in appalling environmental attacks, to which the Member States have proved incapable of responding. A European dimension is required; a European coastguard is required. I do not envisage any extra work here, because such work will only be done effectively if it is done across the board. If there is a problem here it is certainly not that the proposals are too bold; it is that they are too tentative. Commissioner, please show ambition! Europeans need ambition, they need a response to these problems and they need the European Maritime Safety Agency to say when we will be able to put an end to the scandal of endless marine pollution, when we will see new rules on maritime transport. This is what we need! In view of this responsibility, this House must be provided with all that it needs and must offer all the help that it can. We must not yield to the kind of conservative mindset of those who spend their lives thinking in terms of the relative power of the Member States and who overlook what is really important to the citizens.

Political group: PSE