GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I too should like to express my condolences with Spain. It is difficult after such an incident to return to business as usual, but we have to do this all the same. I have listened to a number of fellow Members here, and they assume that the proposal is an improvement on the current situation. What is certain is that this is a very complex issue. I have also listened carefully to Mr Solbes, who particularly envisages an improvement for people who are disabled or partially disabled. I share Mrs Smet's view that there will be problems that will need to be overcome in more than one country. I am not familiar with the situation in all of them, Commissioner, but as far as the Netherlands is concerned, I can tell you that the situation is deteriorating for people who are unable to participate in the labour market, those who probably never have been and never will be again. In their case, it is true that they are not entitled to contribution-based benefits, but this right should nevertheless be exportable, in my view. To those fellow MEPs who take the view that the discussion should be reduced to contributory versus non-contributory entitlements, I should like to press home the fact that there is also such a thing as social justice. I cannot see a need for housing costs to be exportable to another country, because these are related to the duration of housing. However, this specific case is about people, including people in the Netherlands, who are unlikely to ever be able to enter the labour market again. I would ask you to consider seriously whether other rules should not apply here. We wax lyrical about the free movement of persons, while at this moment in time, 1 300 people from the Netherlands live elsewhere in Europe and will lose the benefit they are currently drawing. I will therefore examine which premiums or proposals will receive my backing in order to haul in as much as we can, but I hope you will allow me to ask the fellow members and the Commission to consider this very carefully. Commissioner, I am very anxious about the future of Regulation No 1408/71. Can a committee be set up to examine carefully what the restrictions are? The fact is that, as a result of enlargement, major debates on the exportability of social security are anticipated right across Europe. I would urge you to set up a committee which follows all the problems, looks for solutions and also consults with the Member States in earnest in order to eliminate injustices of this kind in one way or another. I am not saying that this is the answer to all our problems, but I think that the derogation that the Netherlands has requested affects the weakest and least protected. The benefit in question will be exported to third countries, but on the basis of Regulation No 1408/71, it will no longer be exported within Europe, and that is a huge injustice.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office, I think the EU would have far more influence in the Maghreb if there were stronger links with the reform process in Morocco. I should like to ask about progress with the association agreement with Morocco. As you know, we have already debated the fisheries agreement. That is another problem which needs to be resolved. But the question of the association agreement is, I think, extremely urgent.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the initiative of the Commission and of the European Union in general on a broader Europe is a right step if we are to unify and communitise our policy. The excellent report by Mrs Napoletano shapes an interesting political strategy framework for the actual area encircling the European Union. This strategy allows both planning and objectives; at the same time, however, it maintains the flexibility needed for each area around us, based on its peculiarities. Our basic priorities are predicated on good relations, peace and economic and political cooperation. We entertain no thoughts whatsoever of new walls or new divisions. The Commission document proposes the economic element. The report by Mrs Napoletano proposes the political element, which means initiatives for peace in the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans and elsewhere. However, as the European Parliament, we too can take initiatives by stepping up our efforts. Within this framework, I believe and I propose that, as it has done in order to cooperate with other regions, the European Parliament should appoint a joint parliamentary committee with the countries of the Black Sea Cooperation, which already has a parliamentary conference, intergovernmental cooperation, a development bank, a permanent secretariat and, most importantly of all, to which 13 countries belong. They include members and candidate members of the European Union, the countries of the Caucasus, the Balkans, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and, generally speaking, countries with a particular political interest in the European Union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the euro was born two years ago. For me, as a Europhile, it was a great day when monetary union was brought to a successful conclusion, exactly as planned and with as many as 11 Member States. For me, as a Swede, it was disappointing that Swedish Social Democracy had not been able to deliver a result then and there. Now, two years have gone by – without any response or progress on Sweden’s part. We are, unfortunately, the country without an EMU strategy. For my part, I can only congratulate Greece as the twelfth country to adopt the euro. Now that our discussions are focusing upon Greece and we are carefully picking over the Greek economy, all EU countries ought to join Greece in also adopting the euro. Many people are to be heard explaining the fall in value of the euro with reference to the fact that the United States’s economy is stronger than Europe’s. That is indisputable. It is amazing, however, that more is not being done by Europe to reverse this trend. For me, the reason for this is clear. There is a lack of confidence in the European governments. It is time to implement the structural changes which are often talked about but which are still not being carried out. With lower taxes and a more flexible labour market, Europe can enter the new economy. There needs to be more rationalisation of the budget, more exposure to competition, more deregulation and a more rapid phasing-out of monopolies. If the governments of Europe give priority to this work, we shall immediately find confidence in the euro increasing. But many of the EU’s social democratic-led governments are visibly unable to take action. There is a lack of leadership. It is not the President of the ECB who can ‘talk up’ the euro. Instead, it is the Member States which can make the EU and the euro competitive.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Parliament is taking an important step today on the road towards the greater transparency which we have been talking about for so many years. The new rules are a stage in the cultural revolution that is needed if the EU is to develop into a modern, efficient and democratic form of cooperation which citizens in fact have confidence in. What we have here are marked improvements. As a starting point, all documents, including internal documents, are included, and they must be registered. The exceptions to this rule are few but well-founded, and the rules governing the lodging of complaints have been tightened up on. Many here today have criticised the present compromise, and in the case of a compromise there will always be something to criticise. This must not, however, overshadow the fact that this is a good compromise in which the EU is setting a standard for transparency unknown in many of the EU’s Member States. Transparency does not come about through legislation alone, however. It also depends upon a culture of transparency. Transparency ought not to be perceived as an inconvenience for the administration. Transparency is an advantage, not only for democracy but also for the authorities to which it extends. Today, I want to call upon the Commission to take the spirit of this proposal seriously, not only the wording of the Regulation but also the recitals. The Commission should forget the lack of public access that characterised its first proposal and straightforwardly adopt the new proposal and the new spirit. The Commission has a big responsibility for ensuring that those who at present maintain that the new rules are no better than the existing rules are proved wrong. In three years’ time, practical experience must constitute a sufficient argument, and this is what we shall spend the next three years acquiring. We must see how the new rules work. We must make sure that countries which are sceptical come to see for themselves that transparency is beneficial to democracy.

Political group: PSE
Yesterday, in the course of the debate, the arguments put forward by Mr Mayol i Raynal and Mrs McKenna persuaded me not to endorse the report by Mr Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra in the end. It is not only about a neutral agreement with Chile, a country where the same language is spoken as in Spain and which deserves support after shaking off dictatorship. It seems to be yet another fisheries agreement in disguise. In addition, the present Chilean government is taking little account of the minority which is descended from the indigenous American Indian population, and, as a result of opposition from its Senate, Chile will not for the time being be ratifying the Statute of the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Under those circumstances, I think that an agreement of this kind is premature, to say the very least. - Miguélez Ramos resolution (A5-0014/2003)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, when, for the first time, I became involved in discussing this issue a couple of years ago, I was very surprised that only different forms of shareholder interests were discussed: the German tradition as opposed to the Anglo-Saxon tradition and so forth. Eventually, the matter went back to the Commission, which has had ample time available to it, and it might therefore have been thought that the proposal had been developed. Now, a compromise is being presented between different owner constructions and owner interests, but still no concern is being shown for the employees. I think that is incredibly strange. It must be obvious that the employees, just like the shareholders, are interested parties in takeover situations, and it is unrealistic to ignore the fact. In a way, the employees are perhaps interested parties to an even greater degree than the shareholders, because hostile takeover bids are almost always combined with plans for restructuring and, perhaps, cut-backs. In other contexts, we talk solemnly about the social dialogue in the European employment strategy as progress in EU policy. We talk about the Lisbon strategy in which the two sides of industry and the social dialogue are also important. In the present context, all this is conspicuous by its absence, and the old idea still prevails that companies only belong to their owners and that, in general, the employees are no more important than machines or other loose fittings. It is an old-fashioned, unrealistic and out-of-date idea. There can be no legislation on takeover bids that is not in some way grounded in the fact that a company is also its employees. That is absolutely fundamental. We shall of course support the amendments concerning improved information and consultation. Information is, of course, important, but I want at the same time to say that it is not enough. It must be possible, in one way or another, to use information for something. There must be certain rights. The employees must have certain opportunities to act in situations such as these. If the matter were now to go back to the Commission, I should like to give Mr Bolkestein a piece of advice. I think that the offeror should also be required to present an adjustment plan for the new company that is coming into being. A development and adjustment programme of this kind should also take account of the employees’ interests and talk about what will happen to them. There should also be a guarantee against at least short-term dismissal.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The Danish Social Democrats in the European Parliament have today voted in favour of this report because we agree that the EU should develop cooperation in the area of civil law for the benefit of EU citizens. We are nonetheless alert to the fact that the regulation does not apply to Denmark, cf. the protocol on Denmark’s position with respect to the Treaty on European Union. Report von Boetticher (A5-0333/2001):

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to congratulate the President-in-Office of the Council and Commissioner Diamantopoulou on the excellent speeches they have made today. We have high hopes for what you will achieve. We are at the start of a millennium and a century which we hope will be decisive for women and for their opportunity to occupy decision-making positions. We want this opportunity to bring substantial changes to our lives in society at large, we want democracy to be synonymous with equality between men and women, and we do not want women to be excluded socially or economically as is still happening today. Furthermore, we want values that women consider important, such as peace, fraternity, equality, justice, security and environmental protection, to be the guiding spirit for life in the European Union and, if possible, throughout the world. In order to achieve this, women must be given the opportunity to combat the inertia of a society which has, until now, been essentially imbued with masculine values. We know from our own experience that freedom and the ability to decide are not given freely but must be fought for. Let us continue to fight and ensure that this century brings us victory: not over men, not over anyone, but the victory of equality between men and women. We therefore cannot afford to miss any more opportunities, and the great challenge confronting all Europeans now, and particularly women, concerns the new economy and the new information technologies. The Lisbon Summit to be held at the end of this month is very much geared towards women. The rate of employment in Europe, which is much lower than in the United States and Japan, must be increased. We must therefore have many more women in work, and working in the new jobs in which the EU has a shortfall. I would therefore like to ask the Council and the Commission what proposals they will be presenting at the forthcoming Lisbon Summit to ensure that the new economy and the new Europe we want to build will definitely include equality between men and women.

Political group: PSE
The proposed action and programme presented by Mr Prodi are vague in the extreme and the social question is missing yet again. In fact, the word seems to have been banished from the Commission’s vocabulary, whereas liberal and American references abound. Mr Prodi reverts to the contested concept of ‘governance’; contested because it favours state intervention over a proper working democracy and refers to the notion as defined by the IMF, whose ideological agenda is predicated solely on liberalism and monetarism. The shift in meaning is not just semantic... The only logical thing to do on reading this document is to pursue the mass market and generalised deregulation and forget about the realignment of European policy which our citizens hoped for. Mr Prodi talks solely of ‘mechanisms’ and ‘structures’ and fails to set out a single balanced project which responds to the aspirations of our people. Enlargement appears to be an end in itself, but unless decisions are made on a social policy, a common value and an institution to strengthen the cohesion and democratisation of the Union, the Europe bequeathed to us at the end of Mr Prodi’s presidency may well be a simple common market area within the context of generalised globalisation, rather than the community of destiny which we hope for. Finally, Mr Prodi’s complacency towards the Austrian Government in the name of an exaggerated sense of protocol (which in no way obliges him to send a message of congratulations) would in itself warrant a vote of no confidence.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the strategy of the international action of the United Nations World Assembly advocates the commitment to create a society for all ages, with political and financial means dedicated to achieving this. It is, therefore, crucial that the European Union and its Member States give this commitment, incorporating issues of ageing into Community policies and including the elderly in their social, economic and development programmes, paying particular attention to elderly people at risk of isolation and by developing the principle of active ageing, promoting opportunities for the elderly to participate in social and cultural life. There are various ways in which this can be done, as Mrs Lambert has already mentioned. Although the issue of ageing is generally associated with long-term concerns, it already presents a major challenge for society and for governments because of its profound implications for policies of social security, employment, education, health, immigration and the family. This means that the necessary measures must be adopted to ensure that the income and resources available to elderly and retired people remain in line with average living standards in society. It is unacceptable that concerns about public spending and pressures for compliance with the Stability Pact should have a negative effect on the living standards of the elderly, as suggested in the recent decision of the Barcelona European Council to increase the age of retirement by five years by 2010, which we find unacceptable, and in the statements by the current President-in-Office of the Council, Prime Minister Aznar, at the opening of the Second UN Assembly on ageing, when he called for changes to the pensions system, to working hours and to the age of retirement, all of which involve the same issues. It is crucial that we move ahead with integrated social policies, that we promote intergenerational solidarity, that we pay particular attention to issues of universal access to healthcare and of the quality of services provided and that we attach greater importance to the use of the free time of the elderly. We hope that the Commission will propose an action programme that is specific to the elderly and which takes account of all these aspects in an integrated vision, having listened to organisations representing pensioners and the elderly. The European Union must also demonstrate greater commitment to providing international aid to developing countries in order to enable them to develop policies in the field of ageing, specifically for women and in order to combat Aids.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the Commissioner has been very elaborate in his answer, but he has avoided answering one essential question. Under heading 1a in the 2003 and 2004 budgets this Parliament and the Council have twice provided for extra funds to be set aside for research into better vaccines and testing methods. The Commission was at liberty to decline that wish of Parliament. In the light of present developments, is the Commission prepared to investigate the possibility of using funds from heading 1a for research into vaccines and testing methods and inform this House as soon as possible of the outcome of these deliberations? It is urgent that we do something, and the Commission should not ignore the resolutions of this Parliament in this respect, nor the budget itself.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I should like to ask the Commission how it intends to guarantee that economic, social and employment policies will be coordinated, as defined in the Lisbon process, and pursued in a democratically legitimate manner if it rejects changes to the Treaty within the framework of the Convention.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I want to make a point of thanking Mrs Gebhardt and Mr De Rossa for their efforts in relation to these two reports and for the painstaking work they have put into them. Here in plenary, those of us in the Group of the European People’s Party have tabled a number of amendments on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society. We believe that, as far as possible, the procedure for developing a European Cooperative Society must be characterised by scrutiny and transparency. Current provisions concerning employees’ right to information and consultation must be fully complied with. A number of amendments involve guarantees that, right from the start, an express account should be given of the expected consequences for employment of establishing a European Cooperative Society. Employees’ representatives must be given time to submit an opinion before decisions are taken. Because the proposal for a regulation concerns the various stages in the life cycle of a European Cooperative Society, such as its establishment, the transfer of headquarters and liquidation, a number of different amendments are required if it is to be possible to apply these principles to the different situations described in the proposal for a regulation. The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, of whose opinion I had the privilege of being the draftsman, also believes that the establishment of a European Cooperative Society must not lead to employees’ losing rights they enjoyed before its establishment. Allow me also to say very specifically, regarding Mr De Rossa’s report, how important it is to emphasise that, in connection with establishing a European Cooperative Society and in cases of extensive structural changes, there should be the right to engage in negotiations concerning employee involvement. All contributions must constitute an ongoing process. Our report also calls for the removal of the general clause according to which the Member States may be exempted from the provisions concerning employee involvement when a European Cooperative Society is established as a result of a merger between two cooperatives. I also wish to emphasise that the employee representatives on the management and supervisory bodies should be chosen or designated in accordance with national legislation.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, when the Alliance intervened in Kosovo its objective was to re-establish conditions in this province which would enable those who wished to do so to stay there or return, with respect for their own heritage and their own culture. If the Alliance is still active in that region, it is with the same objective. The day before yesterday I was pleased to hear an interview given by the KFOR commander showing how much better matters in connection with this in Kosovo were starting to be, particularly as regards security, crime levels had been restored to an acceptable level. Those representing Europe who are active at the grass roots level in pursuing this objective, and I am thinking in particular of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, are on the verge of despondency precisely because, since matters are improving, there is less talk of Kosovo and the urgent nature of the aid which is needed there is becoming less apparent. We must work to ensure that, in this province and indeed throughout the Balkans generally, the rule of shopkeepers follows the rule of the warlords. It is true that economic aid is, in this respect, certainly an essential element to the scope of action afforded those people active at the grass roots level. Let me reiterate the comment which Doris Pack has just made and stress that we, the Members of the European Parliament, must fulfil our own obligations in this regard, while ensuring, of course, that we are not the only ones to do so.

Political group: PPE-DE