GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I would also like to begin by complimenting the rapporteur, Mr Mulder, on the way in which we in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development have been able to work with him. We are not satisfied in every regard, but we have made good progress. We have a clear message for the Council. Because the interim reform of agriculture policy has very far-reaching consequences for the European countryside. Now that this reform is a fact it seems as if the Council, witness its draft budget, does not understand what the said reform actually means for farmers and country people in the European Union. What is being asked is that the countryside and agriculture be more market-driven and that more countryside policy lead to more dynamism in the countryside. If the European countryside wants to survive this reform, then it is advisable to use the money available more appropriately. After all, to give just one example, the average European dairy farmer alone gives up some EUR 6 000 in income per year. In my own country it is double that: EUR 12 000. Nor will the enlargement of the European Union have its intended effect. A new, longer external border makes the risks of epidemic animal diseases such as foot and mouth, swine fever and fowl pest greater. Add to this that the food safety, animal welfare and the environmental requirements in the European Union for the producer are the highest in the world, then we must have all hands on deck to structure the 2004 budget so that allowance is made for both the consumer and the farmer. Given the high ambition level of the European Union, a small consumer supplement on a number of products, such as milk and meat, would for that matter be very easy to defend. Madam President, as rapporteur for the agriculture budget I have on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development submitted the following change proposals for the treatment of this first reading. To begin with we would like to see more money being set aside for the LEADER programme. The same goes for the SAPAR programme, extremely important for our new Member States. We would also appreciate the introduction of a new budget line for the LEADER EAST programme. In addition, we want EUR 23 million extra for control and prevention. We would also like to see EUR 6 million extra for promotion payments by the Member States, in particular to give the market-driven policy more substance. In addition, EUR 1 million extra for promotion payments by the EU. With regard to the information supply for the amended agriculture policy, we would like to see 3 million extra being set aside. And in the area of animal diseases in particular we would like EUR 12 million extra to be set aside for veterinary measures and animal welfare and public health measures. We would also like EUR 18 million extra to be set aside for the animal diseases emergency fund.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, while the Netherlands allows homosexuals to marry, Namibia despises them. This is the year 2001. Mr Lagendijk was right to point out that, unfortunately, Namibia is not the only African country which is taking things to such extremes. President Mugabe of Zimbabwe terms homosexuals and lesbians, in his own words: ‘animals which have to be exterminated’. His henchmen will take care of the rest. It is, of course, unacceptable that people should be discriminated against simply on the basis of their sexual preference. However, I appreciate how very delicate and difficult this debate is. In Africa, I found out that many people consider homosexuality as something which goes against their culture. Respect for culture, however, comes up against its own boundaries when fundamental human rights are at risk. Homophobic actions, largely orchestrated by the Government, must be unequivocally condemned. However, this should not be all that is done. In the spirit of the new Cotonou Agreement, I believe that the persecution of homosexuals should be taken into consideration in the assessment of our cooperation with developing countries. After all, the persecution of homosexuals is often not the only violation of human rights in the countries concerned. Despite their elevated ideals, certain SADEC countries have recently been repeatedly showing their less attractive sides. It is high time that a fresh wind blew through Windhoek and that the homosexual wall in a number of frontline states was razed to the ground.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, since work is running late, I shall forgo all the oral explanations of vote I was going to deliver today.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Pérez Royo, very warmly for his report, which makes it very clear what progress still needs to be made in this field. I would also like to thank Mr Della Vedova very sincerely for his well-balanced proposal. We all know what a difficult area EU tax coordination is. Virtually no one is talking about tax harmonisation any more. At the same time, we also know that tax competition can have very harmful effects on Europe's economies and on the choice of locations for investment in the European Union. I would specifically like to thank Mr Della Vedova for having highlighted the issue of codecision by the European Parliament again in his role as rapporteur, since I believe that in the context of treaty reform and the discussions on a European constitution we also need to consider where the boundaries of national sovereignty lie when it comes to taxation policy. So we also need to adopt new approaches in order to define where it is in the general interest to set cornerstones for tax policy. I therefore believe that the Convention would be well advised to tackle this subject as well and to call for treaty reforms providing for a move away from the unanimity rule and towards the majority rule in EU tax policy. We are of course still a very long way from that, if we look at this really excellent paper and the very pragmatic but at the same time very accurate paper by the Commission. The Commission has quite rightly taken stock in a rather sobering way as regards coordination. The situation on value added tax is certainly disappointing, because we are still a long way from applying the country of origin principle. The pragmatic approach adopted by the Commission should therefore be supported, even if we should never lose sight of our ultimate goal. However, it is hard to reconcile various other areas of tax coordination with a forward-looking approach. I believe that in the case of company taxation we are still a long way from achieving what the Monti Package was at one point attempting to do. In any case, we need to make sure that tax havens are finally abolished and that favourable tax treatment for non-resident legal or natural persons, which distort competition, is finally eliminated. That should be our objective, together with the minimum requirement for uniform definitions in tax law, ranging from the basis of assessment to definitions of profit. I would very much welcome it if we in the European Parliament could agree on a single set of definitions for these arrangements. That would certainly encourage national governments to take a more progressive line.

Political group: PSE
I just wanted to point out, Mr President, that my surname was misspelled. It has now disappeared from the board and I hope it will not be misspelled in the Minutes of the sitting as well.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Of course efforts are being made to change the system of subsidies paid in the past under the GATT agreements and, if it is changed, it will be at the expense of the agricultural produce and income of the poorer farmers. I have to say that, if you bear in mind that 80% of subsidies go to 20% of farms, according to the MacSharry report, the subsidies paid to farmers, especially in the south, should have been increased long ago in order to meet the demands of the European Union for produce in which it is not self-sufficient and of which 70% are imports, such as cotton, tobacco, oil, fruit etc. Secondly, this produce is high quality and is good for the consumers of the European Union. My question to the Council, given that it has not given a clear answer and, we are told, has not yet formulated a position, is this: will it agree to abolish subsidies in all cases on the basis of the conclusions of the Qatar summit and, if it does, will it take account of the fact that farming will be abandoned in countries such as Greece and other countries in the south and all that that implies, with small and medium-sized farms being wiped out, increased unemployment and the adverse impact on the environment?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, there is currently a serious humanitarian crisis in North Korea. In bitter winter conditions, the combination of few or no energy sources and lack of food is crippling. So the Group welcomes the Commission's decision to provide EUR 9.5 million in food aid to North Korea. But there is a need to reconsider fundamentally our approach to ensuring energy supplies. The Korean Energy Development Organisation, KEDO, was unsuited to meeting the country's needs and infrastructure, and this situation cannot be allowed to continue. We condemned it and the European Union's approach to the energy crisis needs to be completely overhauled. I was pleased to hear Commissioner Patten declare that the European Union will have to develop an alternative energy programme for North Korea. We welcome the Commission's position on this, and we look forward to the development of a suitable programme. We need to look again at our policy of cooperation with North Korea in terms of a poverty alleviation programme to offset the effects of introducing a market economy, democratic reforms and respect for human rights, and official diplomatic recognition for North Korea by other states as well as the European Union. This would open up opportunities for North Korea to access funds from the IMF, the Asian Development Bank and others. The key, as Mr Swoboda said earlier in this debate, is to continue to talk, to continue with the negotiations and, above all, to work for a peaceful solution to this crisis.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, of course this agreement is not the result of an extensive process of participation and negotiation between all the main players from both sides. Consequently, it is what it is. Our support, however, for the challenge of forging lasting political relations between both sides of the Mediterranean is unstinting, and we also hope that the Algerian crisis can emerge from behind closed doors where it has tragically played out for too long. We would therefore like to take up the challenge of shared development. Mr Morillon, I am going to put your mind at ease, please be reassured: we are not interfering when we talk of the democratic deficit and of the importance of supporting the development of freedom in this country. The report of the Arab States office of the United Nations Development Programme says this itself. It is therefore not a matter of interference at all. Democracy is the foundation of development in all its forms. However, in order to meet this challenge, in order to take up this challenge of shared development, we must begin by not adding confusion to the chaos in Algeria. Certainly, this agreement must not give the authorities free rein. In order to avoid this, it is necessary to very clearly acknowledge that, today, it is practically indecent to deny that the violence that has blighted Algeria for more than ten years is down to groups of all kinds, and when I say all kinds, clearly I am also talking about military security groups. This has to be said! Paramilitary groups. This has to be written! Mr Habib Souaidia, who is present here today along with other friends whom I would like to greet, was accused of slander by General Nezzar. Mr Souaidia said that the generals, who are the real politicians and decision-makers, have killed thousands of people for no reason at all. The case brought by Mr Nezzar was thrown out. Will we have just the merest fraction of the courage of this Algerian lieutenant? I believe that we should start by acknowledging in our resolution the suffering and tragedy, the hundreds of thousands who have died and the thousands who have disappeared. Secondly, our resolution must clearly call for the lifting of the state of emergency which is a real denial of freedom, and the public authorities with whom we negotiate, by declaring this state of emergency, have even let their prerogatives lapse, under the guise of military power. How can we accept this?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I ask you to join me in welcoming my two constituents, Paul and Lesley Coppin from Mildenhall in Suffolk, who are in the Chamber this morning. They are two of the fourteen British and Dutch plane-spotters who were thankfully acquitted of charges of espionage in their recent appeal hearing in Greece. I know that they are very grateful and would want me to put on record their gratitude to MEPs from all the different countries of the EU who supported their case. They are with us in Strasbourg this week because they are determined to work with us on new minimum standards for defendants in criminal cases Europe-wide. This is something that the Commission is proposing in its work programme, which happily we are about to discuss.

Political group: PSE
Even with the considerable differences seen in the positions of the Member State governments on the unjust, illegitimate and illegal preventive war against Iraq, the majority of Members still insist on giving their support to increasing the EU’s military capacities and to creating a common foreign, security and defence policy which has all the resources it requires. We reject this approach, both because it represents a clear attack on every country’s sovereignty and because of its potential for creating a Europe based on the use of force. These Members are consequently also calling for closer collaboration with NATO, for a military force that undertakes action independently to be operational with effect from 2004, and for an armaments agency funded from the Community budget, which we also reject. Consequently, we have voted against the report. We call for peace and cooperation, not war. Conflicts must be resolved by diplomatic means, not by the use of force. The arms race not only involves shifting to this area resources that are essential to development and to fighting poverty and social exclusion, but can also lead to wars and the destruction of humanity. We totally reject this approach.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, in German there is a saying that goes ‘before the court and on the high sea one is in God's hands’. Before the court this is certainly likely to be the case, but on the high sea we can give God a helping hand, and I believe that the Commission did this when it originally put forward the Erika I package. We should perhaps recollect here that this package also included the port state control administrations, the classification societies, and proposals with regard to double-hulled vessels. I too would like to thank Mr Ortuondo and Mr Watts very warmly for their work. Mr Ortuondo pointed out earlier that one and a half years have now passed and I believe that at some point the people too will say: how long does it actually take you in Europe to pass regulations when a disaster like the Erika takes place? It would be good if the Council would make a bit of an effort, as our colleague Mr Jarzembowski said earlier. The Commission and Parliament are ready. All we need for proper regulation is the Council. I think it is obvious that – as Mr Watts said – the only issue left to discuss is that of the voyage data recorder. We must be able to find a solution here. I have no wish to conceal the fact that I personally am not one hundred percent convinced as regards the issue of ceilings for the liability of classification societies. However, I think that if we as a Parliament want to stay together, then we must be united in a conciliation procedure too. Sometimes, therefore, one must be able to set aside one's own reservations. But an abstention from voting is also a possible way of demonstrating unity in Parliament. Commissioner, I have a small request: could you perhaps, independently of the two dossiers, give an appraisal of what was decided by the IMO at the end of April on the issue of double-hulled vessels, and tell us what the opinion of the Commission is on it? That would be good, because then we would have the whole package. We clearly ought to enter into the conciliation procedure with the Council. But maybe then it would not take so long. Because – and Mr Jarzembowski is quite right – it is high time that we concluded this and time that we were able to tell the public that we have taken political action. The public expects this, and so it must be done.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, enlargement and its strategic, political and economic consequences for the European Union cannot remain issues undiscussed by the public or viewed exclusively from the national perspective. This is why the debate caused by the presentation of the European Parliament’s position on this promising Intergovernmental Conference is vital in understanding this new phase of European construction which is both risky and open to question. We are pleased that this contribution from Parliament stresses, as the main themes and guiding principles, the democratisation, efficiency and greater supervision of the European institutions, exactly where the respective deficits have been most felt and where the risks of disintegration, caused by the significant increase in the number of Member States, were greatest. Although the majority of the proposals aim to enable and reinforce the joint progress and the integration process in this new and complex framework, and these are to be applauded, there are others which are not so great. I am specifically referring to the European lists for this Parliament or to the rules on decisions by qualified majority or on closer cooperation, for example, in which a fairer balance between the Member States, more in accordance with the representation and legitimacy of the respective bodies, could be attempted. We fortunately have the opportunity to improve these points tomorrow in plenary. As for the countries which were for years subjected to forced and authoritarian integration and which are now knocking on our door, attracted by the success of our joint experiment, we must receive them with our house in order and operating properly. There must also be no doubt about everyone’s participation in the search for the best solutions for all and about the primacy of the values of justice, democracy and solidarity within these countries. I warmly congratulate the rapporteurs on their work.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Liberal Democrats in this House join the tributes which have been paid to Sergio Vieira de Mello and all the other victims of the callous attacks on the United Nations in Baghdad. The unstable and violent situation in Iraq shows that while a coalition of the willing may be able to win a military conflict, winning the peace without the legitimacy of the United Nations is a much more difficult matter. My Group, therefore, welcomes the tentative moves towards a UN resolution which would place the coalition forces in Iraq within a multilateral framework. Liberals have always favoured a multilateral resolution to the problems posed by Iraq, and if the coalition is belatedly coming round to that view, then it is better late than never. The so-called 'coalition of the willing' was a curiously outdated 19th century balance of power concept, which always carried with it the danger of leaving at least one nation feeling aggrieved. What we seek is a multilateral, rules-based framework for crisis management within which there is space for the hurts of nations to heal. There is no reason why the United States should not retain command of a multinational UN force in Iraq, but it must be based on a UN resolution and give the UN and contributing nations the central role in decision-making. Failure thus far to find weapons of mass destruction is leading to searching questions at hearings in London, Washington and Canberra and raising doubts about the legitimacy of the enterprise. The way to give the international presence in Iraq a sense of legitimacy and regain the trust of the Iraqi people is to mount a UN-backed drive to restore security, to improve the lives of ordinary Iraqis and to move towards government by popular mandate. The swearing-in of Iraq's first post-Saddam cabinet today is a tremendous step forward in that respect. We hope that the timetable for elections by the end of next year can be maintained. My Group welcomes the Commission's initiative in convening a preparatory meeting today in Brussels for the important conference of international donors next month in Madrid.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the rapporteur asked you a question which, in putting this amendment to the vote, you have not answered. A question remains unanswered. This is the problem.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am told the House was somewhat startled by certain comments Mr Aznar made about this sitting. He seems to have spoken in an undertone but with the microphone still on. Far be it from me to contradict Mr Aznar, if indeed this report is true, particularly at this late hour. I am obviously not the President of the Council, but I would be grateful if you could convey the following suggestion to Mr Aznar on my behalf, Mr President. How should I word it? Perhaps along the lines that in future he ought to moderate his language and choose less offensive vocabulary. As is becoming the norm on these occasions, the run-up to the Council was in stark contrast to its aftermath. Great expectations were raised beforehand by political personalities, notably those involved in the proceedings. Afterwards, they made triumphal assessments. On occasion, they even released the latter in advance. On the other hand, the media and many observers highlighted the discrepancies and the more or less guarded or even pessimistic assessments. To paraphrase the headline in a Brussels’ daily, Barcelona was different in that it turned out to be a colourless summit accompanied by a colourful demonstration. The new and active European social movement showed its strength. Hundreds of thousands of people came out on the streets, actively representing a burgeoning European civil society. They demonstrated in a peaceful, public-spirited and constructive manner, clamouring for more Europe and a more social Europe. In particular, they called for Europe to show greater solidarity and become increasingly involved in a world where globalisation is gathering pace. These demonstrations revealed the extent to which Europe’s citizens are concerned about the building of Europe and the latter’s role in creating a fairer world. Curiously, the classical saying seemed to be reversed. Both before and after the demonstrations what arose was an accusatio non petita which actually implied an excusatio manifesta, not an excusatio non petita. It was as if those statements blaming the citizens for demonstrating were in fact aimed at excusing or concealing the real problem. The latter consists of a lack of communication, understanding and empathy. There is also a worrying gap between the citizens and the conduct of European affairs, which is undertaken essentially at intergovernmental level. Let us hope that the Convention, that great landmark in the history of European democracy, will serve to establish a positive synergy between the democratic institutions and civil society, which made its presence felt in Barcelona during the European Council.

Political group: PSE