GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the Commission’s plans to slash export refunds will cost the EU’s food and drink processors an estimated EUR 145 million per year. It is particularly galling that the decision to impose these cuts was taken without consultation with this House. Export refunds are not a subsidy. They compensate the food and drink industry for sourcing their raw materials within the EU at higher prices than can be obtained on world markets. It is astonishing that the Commission chose to single out German fruit yoghurt, Scotch whisky and pharmaceutical products for these cuts, apparently for no better reason than the belief that these are wealthy industries which do not deserve assistance. Other sectors, such as pasta, confectionery and some dairy products that also receive export refunds, have escaped relatively unscathed. This is deeply unfair. The cuts are damaging to EU industry and they will destroy the competitive advantage of our agri-foodstuffs sector and they will destroy jobs. The Commission’s scheme to compensate food processors for losing out on export refunds, by encouraging them to seek inward processing relief on a range of commodities from outside the EU, is both muddle-headed and inept. Not only does the scheme encourage processors to import grain and other raw materials from outside the EU – once again to the direct disadvantage of our beleaguered farmers – but it also involves a mountain of red tape and bureaucratic complexity which will virtually exclude SMEs from this scheme. The Commission must devise a new system. Those food and drink exporters who through adding value to their products, constitute a vitally important part of the EU agricultural economy must receive alternative compensation exactly equivalent to the value of the export refunds they have lost. To do otherwise will place EU food processors at a massive competitive disadvantage on world markets. Export refunds are essential to ensure the international competitiveness of non-Annex – I processed food. In addition, the food and drink processors in the EU purchase around two-thirds of all their agricultural produce within the 15 Member States. This deliberate attack on non-Annex – I export refunds further undermines our farmers who are suffering their worst recession in decades. It is also a direct attack on the fastest growing export sector within the EU, our processed food sector. We are committed to 36% reduction of export refunds over six years and we are nearing the end of that period under our obligations in the GATT Uruguay Round Agreement. However, these cuts should not be targeted in such an arbitrary manner on a small number of industries, as the Commission has chosen to do. Access to IPR offers only a very unsatisfactory and temporary solution. I congratulate Mr Souchet in drawing up a good report in the face of Commission intransigence on this issue. He is fundamentally correct in describing the Commission proposal as a temporary measure. There is no doubt that the whole system now needs to be dismantled and rebuilt in a much more sensible and less complex manner, in line with our WTO and GATT requirements.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the Members representing LO and the LCR will be voting against the Prodi Commission. The European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, was designed to serve the interests of the main European financial and industrial groups in international competition. Resulting from undercover bargains between governments, its role is to contribute towards creating the most favourable conditions for the multinationals in their constant efforts to increase their profits on the back of their own employees, the most recent example being that of Michelin, and, more than this, to the detriment of the majority of the population of the European Union and the peoples of poor countries. Its method of appointment, its operation and its composition reflect this basic reality. The essential interests of the working classes are not taken into consideration. In order to justify catastrophic unemployment and layoffs, the European Union takes refuge behind national governments. As for the harmonisation measures which it is responsible for, they do not improve the situation even in countries where the legislation is most unfavourable for the working classes and underprivileged sectors of the population or those discriminated against, women and immigrants in particular, as harmonisation, when it is implemented, is to the lowest common denominator. The Members of the European Parliament representing Lutte Ouvrière and the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire shall consequently be voting against the Prodi Commission.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Commissioner, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this report is one of a series of reports on asylum, immigration, refugees and security. It may come as a surprise that this last point features amongst the others. Be that as it may, this report sets the seal on the task. It will allow us, I hope, to maintain cohesion and coherence in our approaches and directives and, therefore, to put an end to the utterly inharmonious image that we have been given by a European Union that has been utterly spineless in this area. The many different types of legislation mean that we must have an overview and I think that the proposed open coordination method between the Member States will help to draft higher standards in this area, whilst encouraging transparency, visibility and, lastly, evaluation. Since the Tampere European Council, we have been seeking to create a European area of freedom, justice and security. These three words must be applied to a single area, where freedom must carry the same weight as security and justice. Hence the need for a common interpretation of law and, I beg of you, a forward-looking approach to an agreed policy. The European area must also be established with the actors who are present on the ground. It must offer all European citizens protection, and not a refuge from the fear generated by 11 September, this irrational fear which is giving rise to an overcautious withdrawal enabling some people to maintain their xenophobic and racist attitudes in the name of so-called pragmatism. I must reiterate that, behind all these words, there are men, women and children. We would like to ensure their rights are respected, by devoting particular attention to women, children and victims of violence. As well as affirming a Europe of human rights, we in Europe also want to affirm, when faced with racism, xenophobia, fanaticism and the death penalty, that we want to establish a Europe of freedoms, as safely as possible, and not a Europe that concentrates on law and order in the name of racism and xenophobia.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, today we are debating two reports which are political reports par excellence and with which I fully concur. That being the case, instead of elaborating on these two reports, I should like to say a few words to corroborate the arguments behind them. A few months ago, we had a entire debate because the President of the Commission, Mr Prodi, said that European history dates from the time of Charlemagne. The very name Europe which, as Europeans, we all bear, derives from the name Europa, the daughter of Libya and Poseidon, the God of the Sea. Europa was Zeus's wife, the mother of Minos, Sarpedon and Radamanthe. Why am I telling you all this? Because mythology itself, which is a narrative record of history, highlights the relations which exist between Europe and North Africa. The Mediterranean is, to all intents and purposes, the only European sea, and as long as we, in our plans and policies, look down on the other side of the Mediterranean from on high, then we shall get nowhere. We need to get a few things straight. If, in the twenty-first century, we try and base policies on the attempt by certain European countries to find traces of the recent colonialism to lean on then, politically, Europe will get nowhere. We must realise that the starting point for today's debate, based on the two reports, based on the decisions taken in Barcelona, is to see the other side of the Mediterranean as part of Europe. The European Union itself must take initiatives – development, cultural and, most importantly, peace initiatives – so that the two sides of Europe can stand opposite each other without our again hearing echoes of 'Hannibal ante portas' or 'Delenda est Carthago' or a modern version of Scipio. There are Europeans on the other side of the Mediterranean and we would do well to remember that.

Political group: PSE
Generally, I welcome the outcome of this vote, although I wish more Members had been willing to support the amendments dealing with sanctions against companies that fail to implement the directive's requirements. However, there is no doubt that the measures agreed by Parliament will make an important difference for many workers throughout the EU. Hopefully, thanks to the tighter definitions of the information required and the proposal for a delay for full consultation in the light of proposed large-scale redundancies and other potentially harmful changes, we shall avoid the situation where we see workers appealing to this Parliament to protect their rights and interests. I also welcome Parliament's insistence on the rapid implementation of this directive for all Member States, whatever the current state of employee representation. I trust that Council will now follow Parliament's lead.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are faced with two related proposals which must both fit in with the philosophy of the Århus Convention and only with that philosophy. The question of whether or not to comply with the provisions of the Århus Convention is not on the agenda. What we have to look at is how to act so that our governments and the Community institutions can implement this agreement. The Århus Convention is undoubtedly a real advance, as it plays a part in establishing what has become essential transparency, and we are called upon here to present methods of providing the public with access to justice. If this Convention is to be effective, however, it must bear the stamp of modernity and set in motion greater participation among all those who contribute to improving the environment in Europe. That is why we should include a precise reference to the concept of sustainable development. It would be inconsistent to try to make do with an overly restrictive definition of environmental law, and thus to exclude whole sectors of activity that, nevertheless, play an active part in achieving our environmental objectives. I am thinking in particular here of professional groups. With regard, more particularly, to the proposal for a directive, insofar as the Århus Convention will de facto be implemented, the first question is whether the directive is really necessary. This is a valid question and, if there is a directive, it must correspond to the spirit of the Convention. In this case, it must also respect the principle of subsidiarity: this, I may add, is also the basis of our amendments. This is because it is the Member States which will have to implement the requirements of the Århus Convention, and this must occur in accordance with the law in force in each of our countries and with the legal traditions applicable there. I would under no circumstances support amendments aiming to impose one Member State's legal practices on all the others. On the other hand, we must anticipate possible cross-border cases, and we must specify the conceivable procedures for appeals. If these points are not taken on board, then, for reasons of legal consistency, we will probably choose to do without this directive.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, there will not be the slightest beginnings of a peace process for the Palestinian and Israeli people until the political conditions for a just peace have been met. The first of these conditions is the immediate withdrawal of the Israeli army from the occupied territories. However, neither Sharon nor Bush want that. The first steps to implement the Roadmap are, it must be recognised, pathetic. What is the dismantling of some caravans parked completely illegally compared with the aspiration of a people, with their legitimate right to a State? The continued construction of a security wall, the continued atrocities, the continued policy of targeted assassinations say a great deal about Sharon’s desire to persevere with his fatal logic. This heightens the despair of the entire Palestinian people, but their determination to live in freedom within their own State remains intact and we must support this. Indeed, the European Union cannot remain deaf to what is at stake in the Middle East today. It has the political resources to act. It is the final chance for the Council to decide at last to back the opinion of the European Parliament advocating a suspension of the association agreement with Israel until its forces withdraw from the occupied territories. It is time for the UN to at last oblige the Israeli Government to apply the resolutions it has adopted.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, what have we been able to observe since 1963? Progress, of course, but at the present time it is easier to list the points of divergence than the advances that have been made. The constitution, adopted under a military regime, is not a basis on which the rule of law and fundamental rights and freedoms can be guaranteed. Another matter that needs to be raised is the recognition of the genocide perpetrated against the Armenian population. Let us not forget that the European Parliament affirmed this in a resolution adopted on 18 June 1987 and has subsequently repeated it on several occasions. Turkey continues to deny the atrocities committed by the authorities of that time, and the European Parliament has already voiced its concern about the circulars from the Turkish Ministry of National Education enjoining primary and secondary schools to take part in a revisionist campaign to deny the oppression of minorities in the course of Turkish history, especially with regard to the Armenian community. It is hard to see how a country that will not face up to its history and its errors can join the European Union. We therefore expect Turkey to exercise its memory, and we shall reiterate this at every opportunity.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we fully support Mrs Paciotti’s report and its conclusions. The ‘safe harbour’ agreement would mean that we would have to transfer data to American businesses, companies and corporations without the possibility of recourse to an independent authority in the event of improper or illegal use of the data, and that we would therefore not even be protected by those minimal guarantees which exist in the Union. During the hearing held by the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, we took on board the concerns of the representatives of American consumers regarding the inadequacy of the American protection system and we also noted the need, expressed by President Clinton, for the United States to introduce an organic law on the protection of personal data. If we adopt this report, we will not only be expressing our political will to succeed in concluding an agreement containing protection clauses which respect European legislation, but we will also be encouraging a large proportion of Congress and of United States’ public opinion to develop personal data protection laws. If such laws are not produced and the changes called for in the Paciotti report are not made, we may as well call the agreement with the United States the ‘dangerous harbour’ agreement.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I would like Mr Barón Crespo to clarify for us the relationship between the flax case, which is being tried in Spain, and the Eurostat affair. It is akin to my asking us to debate the result of the Madrid city council elections now. There were winners and losers in those elections, but, to be quite honest, I can see no connection between the two points.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, may I take this opportunity of welcoming you to this plenary session of the European Parliament. The signing of the Euro-Mediterranean Accession Agreement with Lebanon is, without doubt, an important move in furthering our strategy to create a free trade zone in the Mediterranean and a zone of peace, security and sustainable development for all its citizens. I think we can take an optimistic approach to cooperation with Lebanon. Lebanon is a country with a history of being open to the outside world, a country which looks to Europe and European culture; it has cooperated with the European Union since 1978, even though the Union went by another name at that time. However, we must bear in mind that Lebanon is in the middle of reconstruction, both economic and social and ideological reconstruction, following the civil war. Anyone visiting Lebanon has the distinct impression that it is still in search of cohesion and an identity. At the same time, it is an interesting experiment in the coexistence of different cultures and religious communities and we need to back this experiment if it is to succeed. I think that the Accession Agreement will help Lebanon consolidate the rules of the burgeoning free market, democracy and economic and social development. At the level of the European institutions and Member States, we need to make full use of the potential of this agreement and give Lebanon the chance to participate in cultural exchange programmes and galvanise its civil society. At the same time, we need to start improving the human rights situation, as numerous previous speakers have said, and the situation of the 350 000 Palestinian refugees there. I am therefore all in favour of the references in the draft agreement to promoting the role of women in economic and social development through education and vocational training and facilitating economic investment. Unfortunately, these references alone are not enough to bring about real progress in respect for women’s rights and I am sorry that neither the President-in-Office nor the Commissioner made any reference to this issue. May I remind you that the European Parliament called in a resolution on respect for women’s rights within the framework of Euro-Mediterranean cooperation for an express provision on the protection of women’s rights, together with a policy for monitoring that protection, similar to the provision applied to the candidate countries which are now about to join the Union. On behalf of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Equal Opportunities, we urge the European Commission to introduce progress monitoring and evaluation mechanisms and to call on the Lebanese Government – and this should apply in all association agreements – to demonstrate the political will needed to carry out the legislative, administrative and other reforms needed to anchor equality between men and women in the law and to mainstream gender equality in all its policies, thereby paving the way for the development we all wish on Lebanon and good cooperative relations with the European Union.

Political group: PPE-DE
It is to be welcomed that the Council’s common position on the eLearning Programme outlined the same priorities as were approved by the European Parliament at first reading. The overall budget of EUR 33 million proposed for the programme by the Council, however, is not satisfactory. If there are insufficient funds, the successful implementation of the programme will be undermined, and it will be impossible to begin it in good time. The sum of EUR 44 million has now been proposed as a minimum appropriation. This amount is reasonable and adequate, bearing in mind the aims we want to achieve. The overall aim is to encourage the integration of the new information and communication technologies into European education and training systems, thereby enabling: - greater intercultural dialogue; - awareness of languages; - development of lifelong learning; - exchanges of good practice. I voted in favour, since this programme provides the impetus needed to achieve the knowledge-based society to which we aspire.

Political group: PPE-DE
The current scale of aquaculture in Europe is demonstrated by the 1.8 million tonnes of fish, shellfish and molluscs that it produces, and by the 57 000 jobs that it provides. In order to guarantee the sector’s future, as the rapporteur proposes, we must take account of aspects such as the following: the drawing up and management of integrated environmental management plans, for both coastal and inland waters; increasing food safety in order to guarantee animal health and consumer confidence, stepping up research in technological, environmental, and health terms in order to find new solutions, and adequate funding of the sector, both for new units and for modernising existing ones. This is why, given the evidence of the difficult situation facing many species of wild fish, aquaculture can be seen as a complementary alternative to fishing with a certain future. We must, however, overcome the crisis of confidence in aquaculture products, promoting food safety measures and modernising production technologies. It is against this backdrop that I support the Martin report.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, to become embroiled in a scientific debate, in which many see a link – and some do not – between the use of depleted uranium and an increase in the number of fatalities, is every politician’s nightmare. There is the risk that in this way, the political debate tips over into a scientific one. I believe we should uphold the task of the politician, which is twofold, in my opinion. First of all, the European Union’s responsibility is towards the local population. It is up to the Member States to assume responsibility for their soldiers. In my view, it should be the EU’s responsibility to look after the local population out there. The second responsibility we have is not to be tricked into focusing all statements on the use of depleted uranium. There might well be other causes for the increased number of fatalities. I therefore believe that a comprehensive enquiry should be instituted into all the abnormalities which occur locally and in the national armies. Finally, something which irritates me no end is that Mr Solana, as well as a number of fellow MEPs, establish a false link between the end and means to used to reach the end, or the link between the war and the means deployed. I was in favour of intervening in the war, but I am against taking irresponsible risks.

Political group: Verts-ALE