GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I would say that the outcome of the Johannesburg Earth Summit has been neither positive nor negative. It may suffice to say that it was a necessary, useful meeting, although the optimism of Rio, 10 years ago, has given way to a certain diffidence with regard to the time frames and to the goals to be achieved. The endorsement of both a Plan of Implementation – focusing, inter alia, on poverty reduction, health, technology transfer and trade – and the political declaration setting forth an international commitment to work together to improve the use and distribution of natural and energy resources provides an ambitious goal for both developed and developing countries in terms of restoring the balance in North-South relations in the world and achieving sustainability of development and progress policies. I do, however, hope that the conference was more than just a parade of Heads of State or Government and that it made clear the need for issues related to sustainable development to be given a central place in the international political agenda. Johannesburg revealed precisely the need for supranational governance which can tackle the world’s many environmental, economic and social issues, focusing particularly on the poor and developing countries. The poor and developing countries’ debt is, without a doubt, a key issue too, impacting considerably on the success of the strategy for medium- and long-term sustainable development. In this regard, the issue of transparency, to be achieved through the computerisation of the budgets of the developing countries, is an essential condition if we are to continue along the path of cancelling past debts.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is about twelve years ago that on Tienanmen Square, the student protest and the call for democracy was quashed in a bloody fashion. During that time, Commissioner Patten was very active in Hong Kong in another role, and well known for his commitment to human rights. One could claim that ever since that period, in fact, the conservative trend in China has dominated, to the detriment of reformers, and that China is, in fact, still looking for a way out of the impasse in which it eventually ended up. Historically speaking, one could say that those two trends are still present, of course, but over the past couple of years, a decision has been made to occupy the political centre very firmly via a central role of the Communist Party – a very classical, old-fashioned role, in fact – and to open up the economy in a powerful manner. This creates enormous tension between the two trends, of course, which leads to enormous inequality in the country. It is clear that China cannot continue in this vein. In my opinion, and my group shares that view, we need a dual strategy: one of commitment, cooperation, talks and political involvement, for ultimately, they will need to take fresh steps at that Congress in 2002, which for them is a stepping stone towards a new generation. They too will eventually need to adopt a different position in such a huge world nation which has the pretension of occupying a place on the world stage of the future and of playing a role there as well. In the spirit of the Olympic Games, however, and given our position and values in Europe in terms of human rights, we cannot possibly support China’s application today. That is why we, as a group, are also critical of China and support the criticism levelled at China. I believe that commitment also means talking in clear and open terms. That is why we are here: to talk openly. That is why our group supports this resolution. China is not the kingdom of darkness, but in terms of human rights, a great deal needs to be done before that country can qualify for the application to host the Olympic Games.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, today’s debate and report on human rights would appear to be timely. Consider the pictures of Jenin which have been recalled in this House today, the war which is degenerating into hatred, the hatred which is taking root and generating intolerance, but consider too the need for respect for diversities and minorities, which is an extremely sensitive area of the uphill struggle to secure human rights. That is precisely why our debate is timely, for it is taking place at a time when we are calling upon Parliament to renew its efforts to protect diversities; furthermore, all this is happening on the very day that Mr Le Pen would have us assert a political doctrine, a design, a resolve to deny any respect for diversities and any form of tolerance in politics. This would seem to be a helpful coincidence giving our endeavours positive and proactive meaning. One more word on the subject of terrorism: I was pleased to hear the point made that terrorism is not a threat to the West or to democracy: it is a threat to and a denial of human rights. The response to terrorism cannot fail to disregard human rights, whoever the people are we are dealing with. It is wrong to punish barbarism with barbarism – and I am quoting Cesar Baccarat here, not our group – and so we demand that there be no hasty convictions, no short cut taken around the proper procedure in the trials of the Guantanamo prisoners, and we call for provision to be made for an appeal procedure as in all trials for any crime. We call upon the United States to act quickly, diligently and rigorously in ratifying the convention which will allow the International Criminal Court to start work. A few words on the subject of underage working, Mr President: we believe that all forms of underage working, of child labour, are a violation of the right to childhood, which is a stage of life during which people are not supposed to use machine guns, for example. This also applies to child soldiers and suggests, once again, that human rights are only taken into account when it is convenient. Although it might not be convenient for the British army, we would prefer it if there were no more underage soldiers.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the debate on the information society and globalisation may not prevent globalisation from happening and/or facilitate it; nonetheless, it helps us to decode the terms and conditions under which it comes about. Besides, this is our basic role as Members of the European Parliament: to identify the political components, the clashes, and to make provision for solutions to the economic and social problems which are caused. European citizens are waiting for answers for the dynamic procedures which have a dramatic influence on their life in the twenty-first century. The International Telecommunications Union took the initiative for this first world summit on the information society held in Geneva, but the UN put its stamp on it, giving mainly developing countries the chance to claim equal opportunities for their citizens and to demand a fairer information society. Creating a solidarity fund is, in my opinion, the basic demand. Internet access and mobile telephone communication requirements need to be met by 2010, so that the most remote communities in developing world villages can have real access. The action plan is very important for this objective. Of course, alongside everything discussed in Geneva, we expect other important initiatives to continue, such as the World Mass Media Observatory being promoted and the new European Security Agency due to start up at the beginning of 2004. These are necessary tools in dealing with the new conditions. However, there is also a whole series of issues which need to be answered. Electronic democracy is perhaps the core issue. At the same time, however, we are also interested in the issues of education, health, intellectual property, security, human rights and economic and social practices. All these require their own operating framework within the digital environment. And the answers are not always easy. That is why the European Union needs to monitor closely and be able to be present with its opinions. I am sorry the debate is being held so long after the summit, but we must act efficiently in the future if we are to be able to express our opinion at it.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party I should like to make the following comments about the Oostlander report. We have agreed to this report, because it would be a way of bringing Turkey closer to European standards. However, we attach importance to the conclusion that this report should not automatically be the start of anything. With regard to Turkey’s possible accession to the European Union, many members of our group do not share the view that it should join the European Union, although naturally we would like to have close and friendly relations with it as a partner. To that extent we believe it is important to state, having given our agreement to the Oostlander report, that, if and when it comes to a decision on Turkey’s membership of the European Union, it will be up to individuals to decide freely, that any such decision lies in the future, and that our agreement to the Oostlander report in no way forms a preliminary decision anticipating any such decision that may be taken in the future.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr Cercas Alonso has drafted a quite excellent report. As we have seen, this is an issue which we are all itching to get our hands on: safe and sustainable pensions, a truly hot potato which gets hotter rather than cooler the longer we leave it. That is why both the Member States and the European Union need to act here. We need a satisfactory pension system, which is why the reference to the 1992 recommendation is, I think, particularly important. But we also need a flexible pension system which has one eye on social change and the need to adjust to the job market. The idea of an active old age has, basically, been accepted. You only have to think of the employment policy guidelines for 2000, i.e. maintaining employability and lifelong learning. I should also like to mention the contribution by the Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities to the report. It refers to the numerous women on widow's pensions with no source of income of their own. We must reverse the trend whereby these widows' pensions are being whittled away. This is one very important matter addressed in the report. As far as the future is concerned, the concept of open coordination is on the table. We must also ensure that this has real meaning as far as pensions are concerned. We should not simply use it as an open sesame; we have to understand that the employment policy guidelines cannot simply be applied line by line. On the contrary, we need new forms of coordination and these need to be created. For the rest, I really do welcome the fact that the second and third pillars are dealt with as well as the first. I would also mention the idea of capital formation by employees. We must ensure that capital formation and old-age pensions complement rather than contradict each other. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
The European Union has a lot more than just the ability to send investigative parties, have discussions, make recommendations and so forth. In the case of Egypt, as has already been said, we have the European-Mediterranean programmes and association agreements. In the case of China we have very many major trading arrangements and, potentially, their accession to the WTO. Could we not use our power, our muscle, in order to achieve our human rights objectives and not just go on talking and talking without seeing any results?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I am very pleased that this report has been presented. Every one of us who has read ‘Desert Flower’ by Waris Dirie will always be shocked and appalled by this practice. I am thinking today of the 130 million women and girls who have been subjected to female genital mutilation, and each year some two million more are affected. I am also thinking of the many young girls who die horrifically as a result. Let me say from the outset that I am strongly in favour of the EU and its Member States adopting a joint position to abolish these practices which are harmful to women's sexual and reproductive health. Within the framework of a joint immigration and asylum policy, the Commission and the Council will have to take account of these aspects of female genital mutilation. The same applies to refugee policy. In this context, let me point out – and this is clear, in my view – that asylum will then be granted primarily when political protection is required for reasons of state. Genital mutilation is a grey area, and it is usually carried out by private individuals. This makes it even more difficult to combat the practice. A great deal of persuasion, public information and educational work is required from all of us and a change of attitude is needed in society as a whole. For me, genital mutilation is a human rights violation which I cannot accept under any circumstances or from anyone. A public debate on this issue is needed to raise awareness both in the EU and in the developing countries and spare future generations of women this dreadful mutilation. Above all, we must ensure – and this has been mentioned by previous speakers – that this practice is also outlawed in the Member States, for I know that there is a major grey area here. I ask everyone to work together with a genuine will to stop this practice.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, on a point of order. If we are to debate this important question today, it is essential to have the amendments that were tabled in the various languages for us to know what we are debating. They are not available. I tried last night and first thing this morning. It seems to me an impossible state of affairs when we are debating a very important subject and amendments have come in late, together with those that went to committee, and we do not have them in our mother tongue.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the interdependence between macropolicy and full employment is evident. If we are to achieve full employment and raise the employment rate to the level of other regions of the world, we need growth over and above growth in productivity. We also need full employment to step up internal demand and to achieve gross income from the EU Member States. This is a prerequisite if we are to achieve sustainable growth at a high level over a substantial period, and a prerequisite that needs to be expressed more clearly in the broad guidelines for economic policies and which needs to be made clearer in the guidelines for Member States. The present guidelines are still too much geared towards structural reforms. But such reforms have only limited scope for acting as an engine for growth and employment. No doubt the implementation of the financial action plan will partly close the gap in productivity between the EU and the USA, but only partly. That is why we need to aim for a higher level of investment. Increases in investment of 4% were possible in the USA during the 1990s, with a significant impact on growth and employment. So why not in the EU? There is not enough emphasis in the broad guidelines for economic policies on investment. I am not denying that it represents progress that all the EU Member States intend to invest 3% of their GDP in research and development, and that they also intend to invest more in human resources. After all, human resources are Europe's raw material. However, more needs to be invested in education and training if the knowledge-based society is to become a reality in Europe. Investment would need to rise from 21% to 25%. This applies primarily to private investment needed to create production capacity and jobs which would make this sustainable growth possible in the longer term, but which would also promote technological progress and thus contribute in turn to increased demand. But public-sector investment also needs to increase. In this field we chiefly need investment in infrastructure, which was particularly hit because of the consolidation process in 2001, with a level of 2.3% of GDP. A target of 3% needs to be introduced for stability programmes here. I think that is worth considering. By way of conclusion I would like to mention that the Commission is quite right to touch on the need for the coordination of fiscal policies. We know that companies are now critical of the fact that there is no scope for planning in the EU in relation to taxation and above all in relation to cross-border economic activity, something we would like to see. As much provision as possible should therefore be made in the broad guidelines for economic policies to ensure coordination where there are disruptions in the functioning of the internal market.

Political group: PSE
SARS is a very serious problem. Nearly a hundred people have died, and thousands more have been infected. Antibiotics do not work and there are, as yet, no antiviral drugs, so we must be extremely cautious. On 19 March the European network on imported infectious diseases stated that SARS could be transmitted only via direct contact. We do not, however, know that for sure. The precautionary principle must be applied. The pattern in which SARS is spreading raises many questions. It is therefore high time the European Union took action. My group, the , suggests four measures. Firstly, all airlines flying into Europe carrying passengers from China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Taiwan and Singapore must have all passengers examined by doctors before they travel to Europe, and if there is any doubt, passengers from these countries must be barred from departing for Europe. Secondly, the European authorities must strongly advise people not to travel from Europe to these countries. Thirdly, the Greek Presidency must call a meeting of the European Ministers of Health very soon for additional consultations on how to tackle SARS. Fourthly, as health problems – like environmental problems – do not respect borders, health care must be a European competence, just as the environment is. A European centre for combating infectious diseases is not enough.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, as a neighbouring state, Moldavia is a sort of foster child to us. We have long hoped that, even with a Communist regime, this country would stick to economic development and the road towards the European Union. That hope has now been dashed and the Communist government knew that it was playing with fire when it introduced the Russian language and made it compulsory to teach a Stalinist slant on history. Language and culture have already sparked one military conflict in this country, which was only quelled within a few days thanks to a broad social compromise, with stability being established in the country through long-term action by the OSCE. The government has now destroyed all that, and in one of the poorest countries in Europe. I think it is wrong that the government is now trying to keep dragging out excuses. We have seen this over the last few days, with the government maintaining that others are responsible for the political crisis. It is responsible because it has tried to revoke this compromise, in one of the poorest countries in Europe. If this country now falls into political crisis, just when it is on the verge of becoming a neighbouring country, it will also affect us, which is why I think the government urgently needs to give in, reverse these decisions and do something about creating economic and political stability in this country.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I cannot disguise my disappointment that the report has just been rejected. I would say to those who voted against it and to the members of the Group that I hope they realise they have just voted against greater cooperation in matters of asylum in the European Union; they have voted against sharing best practice in measures as we move towards a common asylum policy; they have voted against looking at good ideas and sharing those ideas ... (Applause from the left) They have voted against measures to make certain that we are absolutely clear that people do not abuse the asylum system for terrorist purposes. Those are the things we were looking at and it has been rejected by members of the Group. That is a disappointment for this House. (The President interrupted the speaker) (Applause from the left)

Political group: PSE
I share the overriding sense of deep and keen dissatisfaction expressed during the debate. I do, of course, understand the constraints of the moment and I am prepared to entertain the idea of the risk of failure.... However, experience has taught me that, in politics, modest ambitions are never the key to success! I shall not keep saying that I am disappointed, because you need to hope in order to be disappointed.... and I have had no hope since the investiture debate. As for the future, given that the Commission has shown itself incapable of taking action against fascism in Austria, I am convinced that blocking measures to liberalise the single market is the only way of administering a salutary electric shock treatment to the heart of all the countries in the Union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, I can tell the Liberals that they will not be alone in this fight. China has decided to join the World Trade Organisation. This means that China has made a conscious choice in favour of openness, and this will not only be in the area of trade. China will, as a result, go through major changes that will have a huge impact on society. We will conduct that dialogue with that enormous country and we will need to build that dialogue not only on economic interests, but we will, through our electorate, through our values, through our institutions, founded on democracy and human rights, be forced to put this dialogue on an ethical footing, and it is useful to spell this out to the Chinese authorities from the outset. We heard about the large-scale repression of Catholics and Muslims earlier on. Without being familiar with any of the intricacies myself, I should like to warn against the large-scale repression of those who practise Falun Gong. They are a peace-loving people who are thrown into prison in their thousands. We have received blood-curdling accounts and testimonies on this score. Human rights and international law are at the moment clearly the weak point; democracy will gradually take root in Chinese society and find its own way. And the Chinese Government should not react to this with large-scale repression. I should also like to mention the increasing concern we have in this Parliament for Tibet and for other regions in that giant country which are asking for a certain level of autonomy and which want to be able to go their own way, culturally speaking. To respond to this simply with repression is criminal and, in my view, all those who in the near future have contact with the Chinese authorities should make it clear to them that we and our communities are not only concerned about money matters.

Political group: Verts-ALE