GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by thanking Commissioner Monti for responding at such short notice. This has the advantage of allowing us to deal with this oral question under a slightly more ‘prominent’ section of the agenda rather than in discussions in the small hours. I am grateful that things have turned out this way. In fact, this oral question relates to a very important matter, namely the fact that over many centuries the Member States of the European Union have developed liberal professions, which are expected to fulfil certain specific roles. For example, lawyers are required to administer justice, and a notary’s duties include the drawing up of public instruments, while some professions have to obey very specific professional rules, as is the case with medical practitioners, pharmacists and many other liberal professions, where comparable rules and special structures exist. Let me say that we in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market have been somewhat concerned by certain developments in Commission policy on the liberal professions over the years. I am thinking of the debate, for example, that we held some years back on the money-laundering Directive. We always have the impression that the Commission includes those who would like to apply to the liberal professions all those rules that hold for, say, supermarkets. That will not work, though, precisely because the professional structures all have their own particularities and these professions also have special public duties. They therefore require different treatment to normal market players who either buy or sell a given product on the market. In view of recent developments – one being the study by the Vienna Institute for Advanced Studies, which came out some months ago – we would like to know how the Commission plans to address this issue in future. We have actually heard that the Commission intends to undertake a broad consultation of all the sectors involved in the question, and we would naturally also be interested to hear what steps the Commission plans to take after the consultation exercise. The questions we have tabled focus on this aspect, and I think it would be very helpful if Commissioner Monti could also take a clear position on this subject today in his answers to this oral question. This could put an end to a lot of the uncertainty among the liberal professions and provide clarity. In our discussions on the agenda, Commissioner, we have already agreed that, in the next Strasbourg part-session, we also want Parliament to do what we did a few years ago, and approve a resolution to this effect. That should then give you some kind of yardstick for judging the views of this House on the very sensitive question of the liberal professions.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am sorry that Mr Fatuzzo is not here today – I seem to be standing in for him. However, I am genuinely concerned about this issue. On the subject of Mrs Stenzel's report, I would like to congratulate her very warmly on it. I am pleased that we have adopted it today, as elections are being held in Macedonia on 15 September. What is at stake here is the democratic stability of this important country, to which we are now linked by an association agreement. This country has experienced a huge refugee problem. It has had two wars within its borders, many disasters, and now it is afflicted by terrorism. That is why it is very important for us to signal to Macedonia today that this democracy has our support, this democracy, which over the last four years – during which there have been several major disasters – has amazingly succeeded in achieving a balance between different nationalities. Even if quite a lot that glitters is still not gold, when you see the remarkable things the Macedonians have achieved, you have to say that they have earned our solidarity. One sign that we could give would be to abolish the visa requirement for Macedonia at long last. There was never such a requirement for Yugoslavia, there is not one for Croatia or Slovenia, and in fact Macedonia is the only associated country with a visa requirement. We should finally accept this small country as a genuine European partner.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to ask a question, tongue-in-cheek, in the style of Loriot. Where are they then? Where are they then, those who say that we should do proper work here, who are always putting the question about the quorum and, when we are doing the real work here, are absent? Where are these 32 and more who stood up before and who will stand up again, but who now, when we are discussing matters, are no longer here? I would really like to know what kind of nonsense this is?

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I do not wish to reply to Mr Tajani, but only to make two observations. I had not interrupted him, but had listened attentively and – which is exceptional for me – had permitted myself to laugh at the particularly clever things he said. God forbid that that should be prohibited in this House! Perhaps the situation in Italy has got so that one is no longer permitted to laugh at the government... I had not interrupted him, and must moreover say that it would not have been worth it to break into his disquisition. * * *

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the Group fully endorses the argument that Parliament has a right to be heard. In this particular week, however, I agree with Mr Ettl that it is appropriate to add something about the need for early involvement of the prospective new members in the tripartite social summit and the state of dialogue within those countries. The way in which trade unions and employers' organisations are organised varies considerably from one country to another, as does the manner and extent of collective bargaining. The development of employers' organisations is recent and sporadic and their activities are not always coordinated. Where confederations of trade unions and employers' organisations exist, they vary in the extent to which they participate in their equivalents at European level. Much therefore still needs to be done to develop the basis for social dialogue. I know that this issue is one that the Commission has already begun to address through a variety of measures. Its work is of major importance, since cooperation between the authorities, trade unions and employers' organisations is vital for economic and social development and thus for increased employment. As the Danish Presidency has recently said, tripartite cooperation and the social dialogue need to be strengthened if the new Member States are to be able to participate in the work on equal terms with all the other Member States. We must ensure that their voices, as well as our own, are properly heard.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I should like first of all to recall the forgotten Iraqi victims, especially the young people, who have been the victims of a militaristic government, of an empire that is in decline rather than at its zenith. George Bush, the president of the United States Government, is himself the clearest indication of the crisis in that country. This Parliament must not fall in with the logic of war; it must call for the UN General Assembly to convene immediately in order to demand a cease-fire. As a Galician, and as a citizen of the Spanish State, I wish to speak out against Jose Maria Aznar, a prime minister who is disloyally calling the European Union into question. He is a prime minister who ridiculously believes himself to be a key player, together with Bush and Blair, in a new Yalta, this time held in the Azores. His attitude is ridiculous and paranoid. He is a prime minister who, one hundred years on, wants to turn the Spanish State into a new colony of the United States; into a new Puerto Rico.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, there is one dog that has not yet barked in this debate, and I should just like to draw attention to the radical failure of the Dehaene report to deal adequately – mentioning it only in passing – with the regional aspect of government in Europe. Subsidiarity here seems to be a concept which gets lip service but not real action and it certainly needs redefining in the Treaty. The autonomous regions and nations internal to the Union states of the European Union, like Spain or the United Kingdom or Belgium, must obtain effective standing in our system. Reform in the Council would be one prerequisite. It could properly differentiate its executive and legislative roles and in the latter begin to approximate itself to a territorial chamber. The Committee of the Regions as at present constituted is both toothless and not in any sense fairly representative. Are Members here aware that Luxembourg has six members in the Committee of the Regions and Scotland four? I am not familiar with the differences between east and west Luxembourg but I know a little about the internal differences of Scotland, and the principle of representation as it exists is absurd. A committee that was supposed to enable regions and internal nations to counterbalance the states is dominated by the state system. New members will arrive here with enlargement in this Parliament, many of them representing former member nations of union states. Think of Slovenia, think of Estonia. They are small states but their representation will automatically exceed that of the Basque country, that of Flanders, that of Scotland, that of Wales. The principles of representation in Europe, as applied to its nations and regions need to be re-examined, and I am very sad that the Dehaene report has said practically nothing about this. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the Greek Presidency has indeed dealt with some serious issues. On 17 February, it was declared that the problem with Iraq was its disarmament, and this provoked Mr Bush's congratulations. The disagreement with the USA was not over whether violence should be used, but when. Besides, Greece and other Member States did not articulate a single word of criticism of the Anglo-American invasion; on the contrary, they helped it in any way they could. The declaration by the Presidency on 16 April legitimises the attack after the event, acknowledges the sovereignty of the attackers in Iraq and gives the UN the role of mediator in the distribution of the booty. So what if no weapons of mass destruction were found. So what if American officials are saying there were none. If the facts prove you wrong, too bad for the facts. Another of your great achievements was that the European Union swallowed up nine-and-a-half new countries. I say nine-and-a-half because Cyprus is joining as a divided country, but that is an insignificant detail, which we should not allow to overshadow the glory of Great Europe. Seriously, what is the European Union doing to oust the Turkish occupying army from Cyprus? As for your policy in the Balkans, what do you have to say about the subsidised relocation of companies such as SISER-PALCO, which leave thousands of unemployed in Greece and elsewhere? Nor has it gone unnoticed that your policy has forced hundreds of thousands of angry workers on to the streets, today in France, the other day in Austria, before then in Greece, in almost every country of the European Union. This is their response to the attack on all the rights the working classes have acquired over the last 100 years. It would be an oversight on my part not to refer to the farce of the Convention, with the careful election of its members so as to drown any voice of opposition to the European Union, which the President of the Convention is openly leading by the hand. The rape of democracy has created a freak which is redistributing power to the powerful and laying the foundations for the militarisation of the Union. The MEPs of the Communist Party of Greece condemn, together with the thousands of protestors who will descend on Thessaloniki in two weeks' time, the policies of the European Union, which are becoming more and more dangerous for the security and standard of living of the peoples and which the Greek Presidency has served in the best possible way. However much of a fiesta they become, however many repressive measures are taken to protect the leaders from the love of the crowd, however far from the city the summit is held, the thunderous voice of protest will not be muzzled, the resistance of the gathering anti-imperialist, anti-monopolistic forces will not be repressed.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, I am happy to inform the House that, together with the other two Spanish Vice-Presidents of this Parliament, I had the honour and privilege of accompanying Mrs Fontaine on her visit to Spain and was moved to witness her brave and firm commitment which offered an example of the democracy and values which this House defends. When Mrs Fontaine used the words alluded to by Mr Ortuondo, she was talking about the exclusive, reductionist and xenophobic forms of nationalism which put race, territory or blood above the principle of democracy. That is what Mrs Fontaine was referring to, because, as I have said, I witnessed the whole of her visit. If Mr Ortuondo, as a nationalist, is not involved in that type of nationalism, then he has nothing to worry about.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to draw attention to three different issues in relation to this debate. They are forest fire prevention, East Timor and economic and social cohesion. The tragic fires which have devastated southern Europe, especially Portugal, where 5% of the land area and 11% of woodland has been consumed by flames, makes clear the need to increase assistance for measures to prevent forest fires. Sadly, a retrograde step has been taken in the form of the new Forest Focus programme. In its resolution of 4 September, the European Parliament insisted that the amount of appropriations for the European Union should, within the framework of the draft Forest Focus regulation, be the same as in the previous 1992 regulation on the protection of forests from fires with a view to funding appropriate forest fire prevention measures. We have, therefore, made a proposal suggesting that another EUR 6 million be allocated to the programme and that prevention issues be clearly included in it. We hope this proposal will be approved. I would like to know, nevertheless, whether the Commission agrees with increasing the amounts and including preventive measures in the Forest Focus programme. Turning to East Timor: in its preliminary draft budget, the Commission has removed the specific aid line and reduced aid by around 70%. This is unacceptable. We have, therefore, tabled another amendment with a view to restoring the amount of aid to the EUR 25.5 million programmed in 2003. We hope that Parliament will support this amendment, as in the past, but I would also like to know how the Commission can justify this cut, given the discussions held on the budget during 2003 and the various difficulties and areas of instability still existing in East Timor. Finally, in view of the fact that this draft Community budget is the lowest, in relative terms, since 1987, representing less than 1% of Community gross national income, I would like to know how the principle of economic and social cohesion in the European Union will be safeguarded. I would ask, in particular, how we will fight for social inclusion and employment growth, given that enlargement in 2004 will see the accession of 10 new countries whose average per capita income is only about 40% of the Community average. As I believe it is impossible to achieve economic and social cohesion with this budget, I would like to ask the Commission whether it wants to abolish economic and social cohesion through future amendments to the Treaties.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I shall start by thanking the President-in-Office of the Council and the Belgian Presidency's entire team which, perhaps because it includes so many women, has given us some excellent replies. What you said about the provisions of the directive on a mass influx of displaced persons being applied before it is applied in the Member States was most interesting. Having said which, I should like to ask if, in cases such as that in Greece, where 700 people, mostly from Afghanistan and Iraqi Kurdistan, turned up in Zakynthos, Greece could apply the provisions of the directive, including making use of funds from the European Refugee Fund?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the general debate I often hear that it was the farmers who fed their cows other, dead cows. It was unfortunate that they did that but, at that time and with the system we have in place, farmers were in no position to know exactly what they were giving their animals. Now that we are discussing the food and feedingstuffs chain, we must ensure that the whole chain, from A to Z, is imbued with a number of concepts – transparency, information and public access to documents. We have inherited a chain with many links and with large gaps between each link and the next. That also applies to feedingstuffs. Whether their farms be large or small, ordinary farmers buying feedingstuffs cannot at present be reasonably expected to know what these contain. They have no laboratories available to them and, given the way feedingstuffs look nowadays, they can glean no information about the content from either the appearance, smell or taste. Farmers therefore need significantly more transparency and significantly more precise information. I think that this proposal is too complicated and that, in the long term, we ought to be able to find common principles for food and feedingstuffs which are somewhat simpler and somewhat more comprehensible both to the farmer and the final consumer of the food, for example a declaration of contents in descending order of volume and precise information upon request. As the situation at present stands and in view of the fact that we are now at the beginning of this food safety process, the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party will nonetheless be voting in favour of this report.

Political group: ELDR
In view of the fact that foot-and-mouth has broken out in at least four Member States, the foot-and-mouth vaccine which was adopted throughout Europe in 1991 must be screened and even abandoned. Politicians such as the German Agriculture Minister, Renate Künast, who reject foot-and-mouth vaccination must reconsider. The reasons for a ban that were valid then do not apply today, since improved foot-and-mouth vaccines have been introduced. Nonetheless, research into the development and manufacture of foot-and-mouth vaccines must continue. In particular, the following vaccinations should be authorised by the European Commission: emergency vaccinations (ring vaccinations) in regions hit by foot-and-mouth and in zones which are contiguous to regions hit by foot-and-mouth and for zoo animals.

Political group: PPE-DE
In a world in which money rules, neither culture in general nor the performing arts in particular escape this domination. Private investors, bent on making a profit, will only become involved to the extent that they can make money, either directly or in the form of tax relief. At a time when the Member States and public institutions have but one word on their lips, ‘savings’, this means that culture is demoted still further, receiving the meanest share. And the first to suffer are the people at the bottom of the pile, the people on the lowest rung of the industry such as those who work in the entertainment industry without steady employment, who are currently on strike in France in protest against what is threatening to exacerbate their already precarious situation. We are against giving public money to companies and to the wealthy, including money given in the form of tax benefits for patronage or sponsorship which benefit those who present themselves as patrons while taking more than their due, without essentially changing anything about the situation of the vast majority of artists and workers in the performing arts. It is therefore despite this measure, advocated by the rapporteur, that we voted for a report which, as a whole, if it were followed up by practical action, would improve the living and working conditions of workers in the performing arts sector.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, it is an honour for a small group to be allowed to open the dance, as it were, and I would like to do so by saying that without freedom of the press, democracy cannot flourish. The case of Grigori Pasko must make that clear to us. It is a heavy blow to the freedom of speech in Russia, to a country born of perestroika and awoken by it. It takes us back to the suppression of the free expression of opinion during the Soviet era. Hence our criticism of it, for the accusation is still founded on the secret martial laws of the Soviet Union, which are not recorded even by Russia's Ministry of Justice. In them, military personnel are forbidden to talk to foreigners. They cannot even go shopping any more, as for a long time many of the traders in Russia have been from other countries. That is why we have appealed to Mr Ustinov, the State Prosecutor-General, to review this case without delay. We call to mind the case of Alexander Nikitin, whose appeal took sixteen months, especially bearing in mind the fact that Gregori Pasko is extremely poorly accommodated. There are not even windowpanes in his cell, and that in winter. Gregori Pasko does not want a pardon. I wish to point out to the Commissioner that there are remarkable false rumours circulating about that. This is not about an admission of guilt. He is in the right! He is within his rights to use freedom of speech. I would therefore like to ask the Commissioner to tell Mr Patten that this topic must at last find its way into the discussions between the EU and Russia! (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I represent a minority. The new Recital 16 says that there is an obligation to report suspicions 'if the legal counsellor is taking part in money laundering activities, the legal advice is provided for money laundering purposes, or the lawyer knows that the client is seeking legal advice for money laundering purposes'. That is going too far. That is why I am voting against this. It would destroy the integrity of advice. It also has a second implication which has not up to now been the case under our existing legislation: in all three cases the legal counsellor or lawyer would be committing a criminal offence. He would therefore also have to denounce himself. That is totally unheard of anywhere in the world. I am fairly sure that even in the Stone Age there was no law saying that. For some inexplicable reason, the Commission has felt moved for the first time ever in law to adopt a legal provision whereby one must denounce oneself. I certainly cannot vote for that. Lessing comes to mind, who said that if enlightenment is only a small light glimmering in the darkness, there is at least still some hope in the world. You have made the same mistake as with the OLAF legislation, which in the end has even penetrated into Members' offices. You will be stopped there. This could not stand up to constitutional scrutiny. When we were debating the OLAF legislation, I said that the European Union as a whole had had a rush of regulatory blood to the head. We seem to have a similar phenomenon again here. I also regard it as a matter for great regret that the legal profession has shown so little backbone on this issue.

Political group: PSE
We have voted against the current report. We do not believe that a forestry policy needs to be developed at EU level. Issues concerning forest fires and how to fund the fighting of such fires are best dealt with at national level or through direct cooperation between the Member States affected.

Political group: GUE-NGL