GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, Arlette Laguiller and I reject any way in which private capital might be introduced into postal services. The effects of the first directive have not been made public, for the consequences are obvious: job losses and poorer working conditions, public services of varying quality throughout Europe, especially in rural areas and working class districts. A few large private groups will cherry-pick and divide up amongst themselves those profitable sectors of post office activity which the European Union is still preparing to offer them. Now, a self-styled ‘soft’ version of the Commission’s liberalising proposal is offered to us, particularly in connection with the price-weight threshold of 150 instead of 350 grammes. The gradual, controlled liberalisation presented by the French Presidency as a lesser evil is a hypocritical way of handing an essential public service over to a market which is neither controlled nor controllable, as has already been done in the case of France-Télécom. When the left-wing coalition cites realism in an attempt to obtain a compromise solution with a right-wing party, it is a way of disguising its own capitulation to private interests. The representatives of ‘Lutte Ouvrière’ and the ‘Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire’ have not been elected in order to ensure that public services are quoted on the stock exchange and will be voting against this compromise.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, may I begin by expressing my sincere thanks to all the honourable Members whose hard work and constructive attitudes have brought us to this point. It is unquestionable that the prevention of epizootic diseases which lead to food crises is of great importance, not only to the future of European farming but also to the entire population of Europe. The crucial task now is to find a suitable means of meeting the needs of a multifunctional agricultural system as well as those of consumers. In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, I therefore call for the preservation of the tried and tested national systems for the disposal and recycling of organic waste. The collection and use of biogenetic waste for the purposes of composting or for use in a biogas plant are highly commendable from an environmental point of view and must therefore remain possible in future. In Austria in particular we have found these processes extremely useful. I should also like to address the extremely controversial issue of recycled catering waste. The Austrian example shows that application of the highest possible standards of hygiene, coupled with official monitoring, banishes any concerns regarding a possible risk of epizootic disease. This has been confirmed once again in the recent past. I would therefore regard a general ban on the use of pigswill for animal feed as an unduly draconian measure. In addition, we must not forget the investments that have been made in the municipal collection of organic waste and in the officially licensed decoction facilities, investments made in the belief that the future lies in an exemplary system of environmental protection. In recent years, 250 new decoction facilities have been built in Austria. I shall therefore lend my support to all compromise amendments that guarantee the continued existence of proven monitored systems for the recycling of organic waste. I consider it very important that we formulate our decisions on this sensitive subject in such a way that the general public can follow our reasoning. The public would certainly not want to see the prohibition of an exemplary practice. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, as has already been said, I believe it is desirable for Europe and the United States to work together in partnership. It stands to reason. All this rhetoric about partnership should not mean, however, that we evade the choices Europe has to make and the difficulty we are faced with at present. Contrary to what some honourable Members have said, we in Europe are not responsible for the erosion of the type of historic links we have with the United States. We are having to deal with a very particular type of administration. It was extremely unilateralist from the outset. Initially, however, it did not adopt a particularly interventionist line. One section of the administration used the trauma of 11 September to impose its own unilateralist and extremely interventionist agenda which predated those terrible events. Faced with this situation, Europe has a decision to make. On the one hand, it could be argued that nothing can be done to counter the will of the United States, given the power it has on the world stage. In that case, there would be nothing to do except to give in to the United States and to go along with them, even when it comes to lies and exposing ourselves to ridicule, just like those who tried to make us believe that intervening in Iraq was justified because weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat. If we were to go down that road, Mr Elles’ proposal would make sense. It amounts to a free trade zone or in other words a new version of the Transatlantic Market Place. We must, however, bear in mind that this would mean setting aside the Union’s common external trade policy. The creation of this huge market would amount to the United States annexing the European Economic Area. Decisions would be taken in Washington. The United States would not be willing to allow Europe to have its say in decision-making on this issue. On the other hand, we could take the view that Europe has things to say on the world stage and a vision to promote of a world order based on the rule of law. This vision would entail fairer relations between the North and the South. In our view this is important if we are to create a world order that offers everyone greater security. If this is what we want to do, this is not the time to toe the line. It is the time to promote a common foreign and defence policy. There is a paradox here in that Mr Elles said we need to strengthen the common foreign and defence policy while at the same time suggesting we make certain concessions to the United States. In my opinion, if we believe we should promote the statute of Rome and an International Criminal Court, if we believe that we should argue for the Kyoto agreements, the non-proliferation treaty and the end of atomic testing, we must assert our independence. Relations between the European Union and the United States must be rebuilt on the basis of this independence. Our American friends will have to accept this. The current US administration will not last forever and I believe that our friendship will win out in the end.

Political group: PSE
The European Union would have us believe that China is a People’s Republic that respects democracy and human rights. It therefore has no qualms about selling and installing nuclear power stations and high-speed trains, so that the bureaucratic elite can make the maximum profit. Since, however, not everyone shares the communist view of utopia, thousands of Chinese are seeking to emigrate every year for economic, religious or political reasons. They flee China, often risking their lives, as evidenced by the hundreds of victims found dead in ships’ holds or lorry trailers. Instead of taking these immigrants in, the EU is desperately setting quotas for its own manpower needs and, at the same time, organising mass expulsions. The report simply proposes to return the Chinese to their homeland, with no thought for their motives or the fate that awaits them on their return. I cannot support such a step and that is why I rejected this report. I have also put a question to the Commission and the Council about their plan for European charters and the EUR 30 million allocated for the purpose. Making Europe a fortress will inevitably lead to its disgrace. We need a different kind of immigration policy based on open borders, respect for the right of asylum and equality of rights.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot afford to underestimate the importance and potential implications of this historic opportunity to unite our continent and live in peace. As politicians, we must give this momentous process our unequivocal support, even though there are still many aspects to be discussed and negotiated. The political vision endures. The responsibility that we parliamentarians bear at this time must enable future generations to live in peace and freedom on our continent. The standard of living will rise in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe as a result of a market-orientated economy, and underpinned by democratic forms of government. Even though it will not be easily won, we have chosen the right path. We Austrians are particularly interested in and affected by enlargement in view of our geographical position. I personally remember the Iron Curtain only too well, because my farm was only a few kilometres away from it. I would still much rather face the problems that have arisen as a result of opening the borders, than have to continue living with my back to the wall of the Iron Curtain, as we had to for decades. As well as giving enlargement unequivocal support, I would stress that it should take place as soon as possible. Agriculture, in particular, has an important role to play, because far more people are employed in this sector in the candidate countries than they are in the EU. We must tell the candidate countries that they must make the necessary structural changes, so as to be competitive in the future market, and they must increase the number of employment opportunities available in rural areas. The SAPARD programme provides an excellent opportunity to this end, and I welcome with open arms the fact that the Commission has already approved six programmes. Transitional periods and arrangements should be kept as short as possible, but one thing I would stress is that the acquis communautaire must be adopted in full. Particular attention should be given to health, plant health and, above all, the environmental conditions and issues that are so important to us as consumers, and also as farmers, so as to maintain consumer confidence. The reform of the common agricultural policy must form an efficient basis for the multifunctional activities that the farmers perform in all areas. The fundamental alignment of the European agricultural model and the development of the rural area will not produce a conflict of interests between the farmers of the EU and those in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. We want to solve problems together and go forward into the future together.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to say to the Commission that once again we are faced with a problem which relates to Mediterranean agriculture; an agricultural problem – fruit and vegetables – in which Mediterranean production in particular is directly involved. I would like to draw the Commission’s attention to the fact that this is happening far too often. I say this to the Commissioner present, but in particular so that he may pass it on to Mr Fischler. We continually have difficulties with production in the south of Europe, with Mediterranean production, and this is no accident. It deserves Parliament’s attention because, in comparative terms, these problems receive much less attention than problems involving northern agriculture. Furthermore, the Commission must understand that it is irritating for the European Parliament to have to insist on issues which, according to the Commission’s own words, should already have been resolved. This is noted in the recitals which head the motion for a resolution which we are presenting on the occasion of this oral question. In recital A, it is noted that the European Parliament affirms that there is great consistency between the Commission and the Council but, however, later on, we believe that the facts do not reflect this. There was also a commitment from the Commission to resolve this series of problems caused by the last reform of fruit and vegetables. This is not reflected either. In recital C, for example, it is noted that the Commission constantly tells us that it is aware of these problems, but it is not consistent, because it does not translate its projects into facts and is yet to present its corresponding legislative proposal. This motion for a resolution therefore asks the Commission to present proposals to improve the functioning of the COM in fruit and vegetables, in particular with regard to the reorganisation of the producers’ organisations and with regard to nuts. Commissioner, you must be aware that the only aid not to have been given continuity by Agenda 2000 has been that intended for nuts. Mr President, you know as well as I that the roads of Spain are blocked, and the Commission cannot ignore this problem, because this sector is paying for the consequences of a violation of the principle of Community preference and a dreadful marketing policy. I ask that the needs of this sector be responded to. IN THE CHAIR: MR VIDAL-QUADRAS ROCAVice-President

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking our rapporteurs, Mr Fava and Mrs Sanders-ten Holte, and also the shadow rapporteur, Mr Schmitt, for all their hard work on a very complex and detailed report. However, I should like to raise a number of concerns that have not yet been addressed, in particular by the Commission. The aviation industry cannot continue to sustain the loss of USD 4 billion due to delays across Europe and I recognise that doing nothing is not an option. Notwithstanding those remarks, as the saying goes, the devil is in the detail. The proposals before us could result in duplication of regulatory efforts and measures aimed at either Member States or at the full Eurocontrol membership that at present covers 31 countries. Even worse, there is still a real danger of damaging or destroying existing pan-European systems that function to everybody's satisfaction, solely because they need to be placed all of a sudden in an EU context. I refer in particular to the Commission proposal to recreate the Eurocontrol route charges and central flow management systems. I would also question the establishment of an industry consultation body, as this would be an unnecessary duplication of the existing system. It is our duty to look beyond our borders and create meaningful and effective actions and measures to improve the safety, efficiency and economics of air traffic management which will not lead to a two-tier system, thereby jeopardising the current modus operandi. In addition, we cannot ignore the genuine concerns of many Member States regarding the military dimensions of Single Sky, nor the sovereignty issue. On 6 July 2000, during our initial debate here in this House, I informed the House that 44% of delays and 30 bottlenecks were concentrated in sectors straddling north and south, including Switzerland, France, Italy, Spain and parts of Germany. I also stressed that it was inappropriate to use Eurocontrol as the scapegoat. A Single Sky will not solve all of our congestion problems if these Member States and Switzerland do not make a concerted effort to address their specific shortcomings. Finally, both airlines and airports will also need to look closely at their practices, as they too are far too often responsible for a high percentage of the delays incurred. This report has come a long way and, again, we must thank the rapporteurs. But we are not there yet. I hope that there will be further and better clarification once Council has met.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, mine is the last speech and therefore in some way also the most confused. My confusion has been caused to a great extent by the acumen of some of the speeches that came before. I no longer know whether the President-in-Office will preside over the IGC in Rome in the fullness of his prerogatives or whether, as Enrique Barón Crespo claims, he will be an occasional guest of the mayor of that city. Most of all, however, I no longer know whether the epithet ‘human atom bomb’ should be applied, as it has been historically, to the unforgettable Rita Hayworth, or whether it should be transferred, as Mrs Frassoni would have it, to Vice-President Fini. Therefore, in order to set my values straight, I have decided to make a dull but clear speech, something along the lines of ‘God, country and family’, hinging on the subject of Europe’s Christian roots, which is not an ideological subject but one of democratic procedures. Indeed, this reference is not a contribution to the clerical concerns of certain social groups but the historical memory of the truest meaning behind our institutions. Our democratic institutions are in fact the result of a freedom pact with the citizens, who transfer some of their own sovereignty to them in exchange for guarantees and services. From this viewpoint, the states and especially the supranational institutions, are guarantors of the attempts that we citizens make to respond to our needs – they are guarantors, not masters – and they are such because they are well aware that they cannot be the final answer to people’s heartfelt desires. The reference to Europe’s Christian roots merely shows that today’s Europe realises that, without its bond with the uniting and personalistic tension of Christianity, it will always be weaker, more exposed to the political short cuts of totalitarian regimes. To be able to reject humanity to the utmost, such regimes have always preferred to begin by rejecting God, though for less explicit reasons than the politically correct of today.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on behalf of the Group of the , I would like to thank Mr Fernández for producing this report, which is an assessment rather than a legislative report. I also thank Commissioner Nielson for his statement. As the rapporteur says, we have reached the final stages of a regime for protecting banana imports, which will come to an end on 31 December 2005. The European Union has managed to maintain special privileges for 12 small countries, as Mr Fernández has told us. Some of those countries, such as Somalia, Jamaica and Dominica, are among the world’s poorest, which is why they need our help. That date, 31 December 2005, is very close. A guarantee and a tariff preference are laid down in the Cotonou Agreement; they will have to be honoured. Clearly, though, these banana producers will find themselves in trouble as the date approaches. What I mean to say is that there is every chance of the Community market becoming flooded with bananas marketed by multinational companies. Most importantly, the rapporteur has pointed out another danger, namely that enlargement will be used to justify granting even more preferential treatment to those multinational companies, opening up our markets to the detriment of both Community and traditional ACP producers. I believe that Commissioner Nielson is at present aware of those problems. He mentioned that the amount of aid has remained at approximately the same level, about EUR 40 million, in recent years, and I do not know to what extent that amount could be altered to accommodate the needs arising as an inevitable consequence of the transition from a protective banana regime to an open regime subject only to the tariff restriction. I therefore reiterate my group’s support for Mr Fernández’s report, and hope that the Commission will continue to protect this small group of impoverished countries.

Political group: PSE
Where travel expense refunds for Members of the European Parliament are concerned, we maintain our view that refunds must be made only for actual costs incurred for travel on official business. We have therefore voted in favour of Amendment No 3 from the Group for a Europe of Democracies and Diversities, where this is required.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, some of us expected an announcement from the chair yesterday about the Sakharov Prize – to whom it had been awarded, what the voting figures were and when it would be presented in plenary. Could you give us some information about that, either today or as soon as possible?

Political group: PPE-DE
I voted against the recommendation in the Dell'Alba report and, hence, against the new financial regulation. This new financial regulation no longer makes provision for any independent financial control before payments are disbursed from the EU budget. This is a violation of the EC Treaty, which requires independent financial control. With no such ex-ante control, the risks of irregularity and fraud will increase. The Commission has received warnings to this effect for a long time, most recently from its own accounting officer, who was promptly removed. The Commission will have to pay a heavy price for refusing to take these warnings seriously. - Report Hautala (A5-0207/2002)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is quite clear from the previous speeches that the situation in Zimbabwe is one of clear and total demoralisation amongst the people living there. President Mugabe has presided over the destruction of a once vibrant country. Not only that, but he has reduced what was once one of the strongest economies in Africa to the depths of despair. While we all condemn this, we have stood by and watched his henchmen murder innocent white farmers and be rewarded by the President for their actions. Nobody should stand by and allow this to happen. Yet the world has stood idly by and allowed it to happen. That must not continue. I agree with Mr Tannock when he says Zimbabwe should be removed from the Commonwealth. It should not be allowed to take part in the Commonwealth Games. But you will not resolve the problems of the long-suffering people of Zimbabwe by simply turning a blind eye and pretending they do not exist, nor by allowing President Mugabe to leave the country and attend conferences. It is high time that strong sanctions were imposed. We should be prepared to help, and make clear that we are prepared to help a democratic Zimbabwe rebuild, because a democratic Zimbabwe could once again flourish in the African continent. I have no hesitation in saying that. Zimbabwe was once the bread basket of Africa. Zimbabwe was once a flourishing country and it could be again. But it cannot be if we stand by and pay lip service to a despot like Mugabe, who is not only destroying his country and his people, but ensuring that the aid that is given does not even reach those who really need it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I sympathise with the Commissioner over the vagaries of temperature in this building. To paraphrase William Shakespeare, I come not to bury radioactive waste but to praise nuclear energy: that is to say, to provide a reminder that nuclear energy is vitally important to European electricity and, therefore, our people must have great confidence in the safety standards applied to its generation. There has been an interesting debate about whether this should be a directive, which is binding, or a non-binding instrument. I would remind colleagues that the existing instruments covering nuclear safety – national regulations and the Convention on Nuclear Safety – are perfectly and wholly adequate. Let us remember that the buck stops with the Member States. However, what a directive can do is to change the perception individuals have of nuclear energy and their judgment as to whether or not it is safe. That is vitally important. I welcome the changes to the treatment of decommissioning funds in the main text, which was a very important issue. I also welcome the principle involved in the proposal on decommissioning waste – the principle of setting deadlines for adopting a programme and choosing a site. I say that because Member States must take decisions and they – my own included – must be pushed into taking those decisions. That is the vital role of this proposal. Let us have flexibility, but let us set deadlines. That also will enhance public confidence.

Political group: PPE-DE