GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, Commissioner, I should like to start by thanking both rapporteurs of the Committee on Budgets and the members of the Committee on Budgets for the fact that – and this is a first – the lion’s share of the amendments tabled by the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities have been adopted by the Committee on Budgets in the same or altered form. These amendments, Commissioner, pertained to three areas. The first group of amendments related to violence against women, including genital mutilation, rape, the stoning of women etc., in a large number of countries worldwide. We have for the first time included a clause in the budget that stipulates that the aid we provide to a number of countries can be suspended if they fail to respect women’s rights. I welcome this and thank the Committee on Budgets. This is the first area that has been adopted. A second area is about women and decision-making. In many Member States, a great deal of progress has been made in the field of political decision-making by women. Trade unions and employers, however, have done very little to promote the presence of women in their organisations. This is nonetheless necessary, for trade unions and employers have more or less acquired the status of legislator in a large number of Member States: agreements concluded by them have the force of law. They have thus acquired a great deal of power but have not made as much effort to bring women to the fore as our national parliaments and our national political parties have. This amendment has also been adopted, for which I thank the Committee on Budgets. An amendment that has not been adopted – and I will call on the Commissioner, Mrs Diamantopoulou in this connection – is the amendment on more flexible standards for the financing of projects intended for women. The standards are very high at the moment. Many women’s organisations are unable to comply with them. This is the only amendment that has not been adopted. I should nevertheless like to express my thanks on behalf of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the reports from the Court of Auditors have been given a whole new relevance by the current BSE crisis. The European agricultural policy must be given a thorough going over. BSE is only the tip of the iceberg. Subsidisation of quantity increases, overproduction and then more subsidies for reducing surpluses, not only is all this very difficult for the ordinary citizen to comprehend, it is also extremely susceptible to fraud, and the quota regime cannot begin to cushion the effect. This is very clearly borne out by the McCartin report. It is to the rapporteur’s credit that he constantly draws attention to this, and not just in times such as these. Unfortunately, Parliament does not have full co-determination powers in agricultural matters and is therefore only able to make very limited use of the political room for manoeuvre. The decisions are taken in the Council of Ministers; they are reached behind closed doors by the national Agricultural Ministers, with their diverse client interests. Yet whilst they reserve the right to make the decisions, they are not prepared to actually take on responsibility. When it comes to errors, misdemeanours, irregularities or fraud, they are not the ones who immediately take responsibility; no, they always point the finger at Brussels, i.e. the EU instead. There has to be a fundamental change on this score. Not only is control called for, but also political co-determination for Parliament in all areas of the agricultural policy. We need more transparency and openness. This is not about working against the farmers; it is about fighting for a different kind of consumer policy, in the interests of the farmers. Mr McCartin has already mentioned the right key words in his report. What we are talking about here is the issue of direct aid and cofinancing. Something needs to change here, also in the light of eastwards enlargement, if we want to pursue the agricultural policy in such a way that it will lend itself to eastwards enlargement. Even after the Nice Summit, it is clear that the Council is incapable of actually solving these problems, and so to conclude, I would like to stress once again, and this will be a matter of concern to the whole of Parliament, that Parliament needs full co-determination and codecision rights in agricultural policy.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, this summer we have seen a genuine environmental, economic and cultural disaster in Central Europe. On 14 August, on behalf of the Socialist Group, I expressed our solidarity and the need for the Commission to act, and please allow me to mention the fact that President Prodi and the Commissioners not only put their boots on and walked around in the mud, but that, furthermore, Mr Prodi accepted the invitation from Chancellor Schröder, who took action from the outset to hold that extraordinary Berlin Summit, which I believe was a strong sign of will and action. Other colleagues of mine will speak more extensively about the situation in Germany, in Austria, in the Czech Republic, in Slovakia and in Hungary. But please allow me, on behalf of the Socialist Group, firstly to express our condolences, our concern for the victims and also our sincerest thanks to all the volunteers who have taken action, not only those who come from the regions in question, but also those from many others. I have had the opportunity to see volunteers in my country from the Canary Islands, which are rather far away, who were on their way to Central Europe to lend a hand wherever necessary. This demonstrates that there is a common spirit amongst us. I believe that this is the time to point out that we must change our past behaviour. Solidarity must be expressed equally towards everybody, and that is a lesson we must learn from the Azores. We also learnt a lesson, for example, from the Greek earthquake and that is that joint action by Greeks and Turks allowed past barriers to be overcome. It is at times of difficulty that will must be shown. With regard to the decision taken by the House – I am glad that it is unanimous and that the Committee on Budgets has acted seriously – I believe that there must be decisive support. Clearly disasters cannot be planned for in the budgets, but what we can do, as we have with ECHO and as we are now going to do with the fund, is try to create a system of safeguards which allows us to act. I would like to point out, now that the Convention is under way, that the time has come to remove this absurd distinction between obligatory and non-obligatory spending. It appears that we have to pay what goes towards cows and wheat but not what goes towards disasters. I believe that this is an important political lesson. This also applies to the stability pact. The application of the stability pact can be discussed when there is a disaster, but what is not acceptable is that the stability pact is being discussed in countries which have not suffered disasters. I believe we must be very firm about this. Finally, Mr President, I believe that, in terms of our approach to sustainable development, we must be humble and respectful towards nature, which has a memory and may return to haunt us. We must act more firmly on the way towards a policy of sustainable development and, above all, of strengthening solidarity between us.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I want to say some words about Martin O'Hagan, the journalist murdered in Northern Ireland a couple of days ago. He was a fearless journalist who over many years tirelessly illuminated that twilight world where gangsters and political terrorism and political extremism intersect. He has paid the ultimate price for his bravery. It is an unfortunate fact of our life in this world today that many hundreds of journalists die virtually every year in pursuit of their vocation of serving and informing the public. This does not happen so often in democratic societies and it is particularly worrying, therefore, that journalists in Northern Ireland are at risk in this way. The few words I have said about Martin O'Hagan are entirely inadequate to convey the shock and the horror that people of all political and religious persuasions in Ireland feel at this horrible deed. I should like to link this with other matters we have debated at previous part-sessions – indeed I am sure we will be debating them again this week – and make an appeal about the language we use to describe these terrorists. We should stop referring to them as Protestants, Catholics or Muslims: they are political extremists. It is important that we make that distinction. (Applause) The individuals concerned adhere to one or other religion, or have no religion, but their objectives are political, and the one common thing that unites them is their contempt for democracy and humanity. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, this is the first time that I have spoken in an explanation of vote, but I have succumbed to the temptation to express my complete disagreement with the fact that the European Council in Nice has determined the number of MEPs in this House and their distribution by state, when that power should logically fall to this House, which represents the citizens of Europe and which holds an important position within the European Union.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I voted for this report, which is an excellent initiative for creating a coherent, clear and effective policy at Community level on the problem of illiteracy. This is a problem that has never received the attention it deserves, probably because until very recently it was taken for granted that the more highly developed countries did not have problems of illiteracy due to their systems of compulsory education. It should be noted that the last Community actions specifically concerning this problem were approved in 1987. Nevertheless, the OECD report on reading and writing, published in June 2000, clearly shows this not to be the case, in other words, that illiteracy is a reality in our countries, entailing high economic and social costs. The OECD defined literacy as “the reading and writing abilities that adults use in their everyday lives, at work or in the community, to achieve their objectives, to acquire knowledge and to increase their potential”. This being the case, the existence of illiteracy is a negation of one of the most basic human rights, which is the right to education, and is also a barrier to access to other rights, because it prevents people from improving their standard of living, restricts access to the labour market, limits individuals’ freedom of expression and, consequently, their participation in society, and prevents them from enjoying the civic rights to which they are entitled. The figures available to us on the scale of this phenomenon at Community level cannot be underestimated, because they affect a considerable percentage of the population of the Union European between 15 and 65 years of age. It comes as no surprise, but always with considerable unhappiness, that my country, Portugal, is the worst affected. Unless something is done, this problem will only get worse. (The President cut the speaker off pursuant to Rule 137 of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I want to welcome Mr Miranda's initiative in asking this question and I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Commissioner Lamy on his splendid initiative on 'Everything but arms', which we were associated with in Parliament, but did not have very much to do with. It must be pointed out that the poorest and the least developed countries must be given special attention and, in the process, elimination of extreme poverty should be the primary goal. According to UNCTAD calculations, while the gross domestic product of 49 LDCs rose by no more than 0.9% per year in real terms between 1990 and 1998, worldwide GDP grew by more than 2.5% per year. Good governance is a key issue in the LDCs. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that there are many countries which are nominally democratic, but where, owing to their lack of an effective and fair legal system, there is no freedom for their people. We in this Parliament should promote the rule of law as an essential criterion when we look at good governance criteria. It is a matter of record also that the proportion of our aid budgets that goes to the LDCs has fallen while the proportion that goes to middle-ranking countries, such as Morocco and Algeria, has risen. This is absolutely wrong. The aid budget must concentrate on the poorest. That is what our citizens expect and require. Using the aid budget as some sort of underhand immigration policy is wrong. Have an anti-immigration policy, by all means, but be honest about it. We must not rob the poorest countries to achieve our own political ends. Drastic reductions in the debt burden of heavily indebted poor countries are urgently needed as action taken so far under the HIPC initiative will, as a result of falling raw material prices, be completely inadequate for any sustained financial relief. I must also stress the need to guarantee funds to be set up or topped up in order to provide incentives for greater private investment and for the implementation of measures to encourage small loan arrangements, such as those introduced by the Gramien Bank in Bangladesh. Finally, we must do everything we can to prevent conflict. Conflict prevention is a key to helping the LDCs grow.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, we are in favour of and support the Commission's communication on reinvigorating EU actions on human rights and democratisation in the southern and eastern Mediterranean. We are convinced that the enormous challenge of developing these neighbouring regions can only be possible, in terms of European responsibilities, if we combine responsibility and management. In other words, through the sound implementation of association agreements with strong political and cultural impetus, in a context in which the norm is increasingly represented by voices and images of poverty, fanaticism and terrorism rather than by the aims of genuinely moving towards freedom, social cohesion and peace. We therefore support this initiative and we advocate that in terms of the European Union’s general policy, as far as human rights are concerned, we should not resort to closing our eyes, on the one hand, for the sake of a false realpolitik, nor, on the other hand, be content with mere condemnations or protests. We must be ‘consequentialist’ in our policies towards the countries of the southern and eastern Mediterranean. In other words, our priority must always be to consider the consequences of our policies in this regard. As the Commissioner has said quite rightly, there is a strategy which will soon be ten years old – that of the Barcelona process – and all we have to do is remember that, since Barcelona is an Olympic city, the entrance to the Commission's offices should display the motto 'Citius, altius, fortius' for the development of our Euro-Mediterranean policy.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, through the consolidation of existing directives this framework directive establishes the basic principle of a sustainable water policy in the European Union. It is a framework for the protection and management of our water – surface, ground, transitional and coastal – through the establishment of river basin districts at national and, in our case in Ireland, cross-border level. Ireland is very supportive of the common position and many of the European Parliament amendments. A 25-year roll-out for legislation, for example, is hardly acceptable. We have no difficulty with the 'polluter pays' principle in relation to the recovery of costs on water usage at industrial, commercial and agricultural level. However, I feel very strongly that as water is life and access to clean drinking water is a basic human right, this directive must allow for a basic domestic water provision free of charge, a quota per household for drinking, cooking and sanitation. We must of course pay for wastage and luxury use at domestic level and the recovery of costs can be balanced accordingly. The introduction of water meters is viewed with great suspicion in Ireland where we have had no domestic water charges and hence no meters since 1977. Meters could be viewed as a very important tool in water management by the new river basin districts, to help the elimination of water wastage and for the proper planning of future requirements. The whole purpose of this directive is to promote sustainable use of water in the EU. Water is a scarce and precious natural resource. Ideally, I would like Amendment No 45 to fall tomorrow so that the common position on Article 9 would hold on water charges. That would allow for subsidiarity on a cost policy for water charges, with each Member States drawing up its own scheme, so long as the principles of this directive on incentives for sustainable and efficient use of water are fully protected. If Amendment No 45 does not fall, I will have to move an oral amendment tomorrow to ensure that Member States may grant exemptions to the provisions of this article in order to allow a basic level of water use for domestic purposes before contributions to the recovery of cost of water services. All legislation must be enforceable and be based on the general principle of political acceptance. I believe that access to clean drinking water without charge is a basic human right in the developed as well as the developing world.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, firstly I would thank the rapporteur for explicitly mentioning the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries, although we regret that it has not been included in the report. I say this especially, Commissioner, so that you can communicate to the Commission, and particularly to Mr Fischler, the fact that the common fisheries policy is one of the few areas of Community activity where until now very few steps have been taken in the creation of a genuine internal market. The lack of action is related to the original conception of this policy. The current Council Regulation No 3760/92 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture, provides for derogations in respect of the internal market, notably in Articles 6 and 7, which allow derogations from the principle of freedom of access to fishing grounds, so that Member States have the right of exclusive exploitation of their fisheries resources within a 12-mile coastal band, as well as a series of preferential fishing rights, through application of the ‘relative stability’ principle, which distributes national fishing quotas. At the same time it lays down restrictions on exercising fishing activities in certain areas known as ‘boxes’. These restrictions on the principle of freedom of action, which were originally intended to be temporary restrictions, have been extended and will be in force until 1 January 2003 as a mechanism to allow certain Member States’ fishing industries to adapt to the rules of free competition in an increasingly open and globalised market. Over 20 years have passed and, as we are about to embark upon a general review of all aspects of the common fisheries policy which, for compelling legal reasons, must take place in 2002, it is now time, I believe, to examine whether the transitional period for adaptation to free competition provided for in the said regulation should be ended. In my opinion, the fishing industry and the common fisheries policy should also be subject to derogations in respect of the internal market. Therefore, the principles and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Treaties should also be applied to fisheries, in other words, the framework of the common fisheries policy should be brought into line with the general legal framework of Community legislation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have just two comments to make. Firstly, the German translation of recital A is incorrect, so please use the English version here. A further point is this: in our calls to the Commission, a mistake has crept in to paragraph 2. I would ask you to delete the following words, as they make no sense in legal terms. After the words ‘WIPO Treaty’, the following four words – ‘on Performances and Phonograms (WPPT)’ must be deleted. It is incorrect. ‘WIPO Treaty’ should stand, and the following four words plus the parentheses must be deleted. (The House gave its assent to the tabling of the oral amendment) (Parliament adopted the resolution) *** Report (A5-0142/2003) by Mr José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the Broad Guidelines of the Economic Policies of the Member States and the Community for 2003-2005 [COM(2003 170 – C5-0189/2003 – 2003/2074(INI)] Before the vote on Amendment No 11

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, Parliament voted to reduce the Strasbourg part-session to four days, with a consequent reduction in the number of working days for ancillary staff. We are asking that they should not be penalised financially.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I would like to wish the President-in-Office and his government colleagues every success during the Irish presidency. While I acknowledge that the Irish presidency has to tread sensitively in pursuing progress on the draft Constitution, I support Commissioner Prodi's warning that failure to reach agreement will inevitably lead to the creation of a two-speed Europe. If unanimous agreement on the Constitutional Treaty cannot be achieved, then the only alternative is the creation of a two-speed Europe. To do otherwise would be to give the power of veto to any eurosceptic Member State. A two-speed Europe already exists in at least two areas: namely the Schengen Agreement and the single currency. Schengen allowed for full implementation in the countries subscribing to the Single Act, especially as regards the free movement of persons. The decision by the United Kingdom and Ireland to opt out – although in our case this was for unavoidable reasons because of the UK position – did not prevent this from happening. Additionally, the decision by the United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark to opt out of the single currency did not prevent its establishment, which, given the magnitude of the technical problems involved, was a massive achievement by the Commission. Its implementation was a momentous, historic development, representing the largest quantum leap towards political union. Given these experiences, we should not be alarmed at the prospect of taking similar decisions in other areas rather than face paralysis and stagnation at the hands of eurosceptic Member States. Fundamental to the dream of the founding fathers of our Union, 50 years ago, was the imperative to cede national sovereignty in exchange for the greater sovereignty of a united continent. The proposed Constitution is the fulfilment of that dream, to be pursued, if necessary, without those states where nationalistic chauvinism still rules. President-in-Office, your challenge is to ensure that the debate on the Constitution is concluded over the next six months; this is a difficult task, but let me wish you every success in this particularly historic task.

Political group: PPE-DE