GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, Mrs Cauquil and Mrs Bordes, who are also present, join me in this explanation of vote. We have voted against this resolution to affirm our opposition not only to a common European army but to national armies as well. The past half-century shows that the armies of the great imperialist powers of Europe, in alliance or each on its own hunting ground, were not there to defend the people, but to carry on wars of pillage. For example, the French army was used for the colonial wars: Madagascar, Indo-China, Algeria. Since these colonies became independent, it has intervened to support infamous dictatorships, especially in its former African colonies. The other former colonial powers of Europe have done the same in the same situation. The recent intervention by European armies against Serbia and Kosovo is certainly nothing to be proud of. The author of the report is careful not to specify which enemy the future European army is intended to fight. So what is it for and who is it against, if not to allow the great powers of Europe to be able to continue, on behalf of the European Union as a whole, their Community political game in Africa, the West Indies or elsewhere? Consequently, not only do we refuse to vote in favour of any resources whatsoever, human or financial, for this army, but we protest against its very existence.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I just wanted to add to what Mr Pirker has said by pointing out that I voted in favour of point 42 of the Haarder report despite the fact that it contains an error because Austria is named in connection with freedom of movement. The executive committee of the Nationalrat (National Assembly) has passed a resolution unanimously adopting the motion for the executive committee to reach an agreement under paragraph 2 of the Law of 3 April 1919 on the resolution by the Federal government of 26 March 1996 and to consider the declarations of renunciation by Felix Habsburg-Lothringen and Karl Ludwig Habsburg-Lothringen as adequate, so that nothing now stands in the way of their being issued with passports which will allow them to enter Austria. I am therefore able to tell the House that both Felix Habsburg-Lothringen and Karl Ludwig Habsburg-Lothringen have valid passports without any form of restriction. Neither signed the declarations of renunciation required by the constitutional office, because they have distanced themselves from the house of Habsburg; instead they merely entered the following statement on their passport applications: “In order to avoid misunderstandings, let it be noted in this connection that I, the applicant, have not and do not question the republican form of government of Austria nor have I ever considered making any manner of claim to sovereignty”. The call on Austria to take action in relation to freedom of movement is therefore devoid of any substance.

Political group: PPE-DE
I welcome the steps to simplify the enlargement process that were taken at the European Council Summit in Nice. As I have stated on a number of occasions, I am against the development of a common military defence force and cannot support qualified majority voting under the second pillar, i.e. within foreign, security and defence policy. - García-Margallo y Marfil report (A5-0334/2000)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to support Mr Posselt’s position in contesting the procedure that was used at the last moment, when a debate was scheduled on the subject. Whatever the subject and whatever the debate, insofar as a text has to be debated, I find it unacceptable that, simply for reasons of convenience, it should be decided at the last minute that there will be no debate. This was a question of convenience. Parliament should not establish agendas and organise the sitting according to the convenience of individuals. Second point: I think that this shows, once again, that the agenda for Thursday afternoons indicates a clear desire to devoid this sitting of meaning, which is quite unacceptable. All the reports to be dealt with on Thursday afternoon should be treated with equal dignity. As there are few reports, so-called less important reports, Parliament empties and the reports, particularly those dealing with human rights, and others, are not subject to any debate worthy of the name for the purpose of establishing positions. Of course, Mr van Hulten explained the problem very well: a constant desire to violate the Treaty and to prevent Strasbourg’s right as a seat of Parliament from being recognised, including on Monday afternoons. Again, we can clearly see the scheming that is taking place.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would like to begin by thanking the presidency for the hospitality shown in Ireland. It was indeed a memorable occasion, though I did not know that we were in Mr Roche's constituency. Of course, we were very well received and the hospitality was superb. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Roche. The spirit of your remarks and of Commissioner Patten's shows that, despite the enormous difficulties we have had in transatlantic relations in the past few months, a great deal could be achieved at this EU-US Summit if we have sufficient courage to do so. The remarks made give me some encouragement that we can make real progress. My first point concerns the question of the joint study – which you mentioned, Commissioner – looking at the economic aspects. I warmly welcome that because, if we can look at the remaining barriers to trade, we can aim for a barrier-free transatlantic market. Perhaps you might have the courage to say that this should be done within a ten-year period. That would genuinely galvanise communities on both sides to overcome the remaining obstacles. My second point, perhaps as important, is that we should look at the broader framework of transatlantic relations. As you have said, Commissioner, so many subjects form part of this agenda: the environment, foreign policy, industrial and social policy and, as we have seen, PNR data as well. It now needs a new framework to take these into account and, in particular, bring the parliamentary dialogue into the broader framework of the relationship. I therefore welcome the fact that you wish to carry out an independent review. I hope this wish will be shared by our American friends as well, so that at the EU-US summit next year, when we have the incoming administrations, we would be able to pave the way for a broader agreement, possibly a partnership agreement, to be struck between the EU and the US perhaps by 2007. Thank you very much for your comments. I wish you well, President-in-Office, and hope that, when you come to Dublin, we will have a statement to set out the future of the relationship which both Europeans and Americans can recognise.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, having heard the debate, I would like to draw your attention to a fact: following the terrorist action by Chechen rebels, 120 hostages have died, but also 50 terrorists. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that, although we are talking about terrorists, there can never be any justification for an entirely summary execution such as that carried out by Russian troops when those people were probably fast asleep. I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that no section of the press has spoken about this, which is very serious, because it is an offence against democratic and human co-existence – whether or not they are terrorists – and also to the fact that there has been no mention in this House of this action, which was outrageously barbaric.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the action plan states in its analysis that the status quo in Albania is worrying. The poor social, economic and political conditions combined with a lack of or insufficient legal certainty and organised crime are causing migration on a huge scale. Albania is a significant country of transit and origin for immigration into the European Union. On the other hand, positive efforts are being made to drive forward the democratisation process and to develop society, which we must and will support. Restricting the number of immigrants coming into the EU from and through Albania is the main aim of the action plan. To achieve this, measures are needed which work in two different directions. Firstly, the positive forces in Albania need to be supported; secondly, legal instruments need to be created for immigration from this region, which restrict or stop illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings, as well as the diverse forms of crime associated with them such as illicit employment and prostitution. We need preventative measures specially tailored to Albania, which will provide support for building or rebuilding the country so as to enable people to live in dignity in the region. Many reasons for emigrating, seeking asylum and taking flight would thus cease to exist. But what we need on the other hand are stringent, uniform legal instruments for immigration in the whole of the European Union. These legal instruments cannot, however, include provisions to legalise criminal actions. Gangs of smugglers do not provide a service, generously rescuing people from persecution by totalitarian states. Paid traffickers, most of whom are involved in large-scale, cross-border organised crime, make cruel profits out of the misfortune and hopes of the people concerned and do not provide magnanimous humanitarian services. In this context, the proposal tabled by Mrs Schröder, to make EU aid available to the traffickers, must also be condemned as counterproductive and contemptuous of human life. (Applause) You, Mrs Karamanou, are certainly right because the traffickers are not the root of the evil. But the root of the evil is not the European Union either. The root of the evil are the conditions in the countries of origin. I welcome the action plan, but I cannot support what Mrs Karamanou says in her report because she does not describe the illegal crossing of borders as a criminal act and therefore says that it is legal. For us to tackle the causes, however, and not continue just to fight against the symptoms, we need to provide help in the regions concerned and we need to resolve the whole issue of immigration, asylum and war refugees in the European Union by coming up with solutions which do justice to the immigrants but also to the host countries. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
We Moderates believe it is one of the European Union’s tasks to prevent the outbreak of serious infectious diseases and, when they do occur, to coordinate the response. With freedom of movement within the EU and rapid ways of transmitting infections across its borders, a European Centre could quickly take action to reduce and limit the effects and spread of outbreaks of disease. We think it inappropriate to extend the Centre’s competence to include general public health issues. We believe that the Commission’s proposals on important points are better than the European Parliament’s proposals, which is why we choose to support the Commission’s proposals.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr Nielson, let me take this opportunity to remind you that on 10 April our Parliament voted on a Resolution to freeze the Association Agreement. Now, eighteen months later, this Resolution is still being ignored. Could we see this as unwavering support for the Israeli state’s policy despite its violations of human rights and international law? We could, for we are talking about economic, commercial agreements, about financial interests, but we also about the right to life. This colonial war claims more and more victims. Even though the roadmap made provision to colonisation to be put on ice, the Jewish colonies continue to grow and roads around them are still being built. In Israel the situation is tragic. The discrimination against some Israeli citizens is increasing; they are persecuted, denied certain rights because they are Arab Israelis. The Knesset enacted a law to prevent Palestinians from obtaining Israeli citizenship by marriage. This is a discriminatory and racist law. A recent report by FIDH, the International Federation for Human Rights, has revealed to us a modern form of slavery of migrant workers. Even Mr Abraham Burg, a former President of the Knesset, raised the alarm. He said that Israel is a framework of corruption, based on foundations of oppression and injustice, which reduces itself to a colonist state, headed by a clique of individuals who are without morals, are above the law and corrupt. In the occupied territories the situation is tragic. A wall of shame embodies the apartheid and injustice, and the Palestinian society is living a tragedy. We are not, of course, going to count the deaths. Who are the victims of terrorism though, of this State terrorism that assassinates refugees on a daily basis? To conclude, Mr President, I will say that we cannot remain silent. Is it not our duty to put pressure on the Israeli Government, with all the means that we have at our disposal including economic and commercial ones? Why not paralyse the Association Agreement as we courageously did before in South Africa against the apartheid?

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the present Financial Regulation is out of date. It no longer meets the requirements of modern financial management. The Commission has put forward a proposal for a new Financial Regulation based on the principles of decentralised responsibility and transparency. The two rapporteurs, Mr Dell’Alba and Mr van Hulten, have worked through the proposal in the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Budgetary Control and tabled amendments. They deserve praise and recognition for this. However, my group finds a number of points still open. Firstly, the Commission’s most recent report on combating fraud in the year 2000 showed a massive increase in fraud and irregularities compared to the previous year. Around EUR 2 billion were lost. Experience shows that at best 15% to 20% of the losses can be recovered. In such circumstances, is there any sense in abolishing preventive ex ante checks by independent financial control? We do not want a return to schematic centralised preliminary controls that took away responsibility and created a false sense of security. Rather, on the basis of efficient risk analyses and random checks, independent financial controllers should in future help to ensure decentrally that taxpayers’ money is not spent illegally from the outset. Secondly: with more responsibility at all levels, it will in future be possible to hold financial actors liable for negligence or deliberate breaches of the financial regulations. Our motion here is designed to create a fair procedure by means of an independent body for all institutions. On the matter of independence: we are astonished to note that the Commission in its proposal for the new Financial Regulation has quietly deleted the independent right of action for internal auditors that is enshrined in the present Financial Regulation. We should like to restore this again through a motion. The final point: the Advisory Committee on Procurements and Contracts. This is the advisory body that must be consulted before contracts are awarded. At the last session in Strasbourg, this House resolved to reform this procedure. I think we will lose credibility if we now call for the body to be abolished 14 days later.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, both Kazakhstan and Tajikistan are authoritarian regimes or dictatorships where fundamental freedoms are flouted, political activity suppressed and where torture still takes place. We naturally support the calls to respect democratic rights and freedoms in these two countries and we condemn the executions that continue to take place in Tajikistan. It should however be emphasised that the Kazakh regime’s failure to respect human rights, which the European Parliament is preparing to condemn, does not bother the large oil trusts at all. These trusts are fighting it out with billions of dollars – 13 million, more than in Russia – for the Kazakh energy reserves, which are considerable. Nor does it bother the building groups, including Bouygues, which have made considerable amounts of money thanks to the construction of the new capital, Astana. This means that these trusts, among the main pillars of capitalism in the so-called democratic Western countries, are also the pillars of dictatorships, both in Central Asia, the Middle East, or elsewhere.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, last Sunday a demonstration took place in Zaragoza against the National Hydrological Plan, one of the many we have been organising in Aragon. Almost 100 000 people attended. It was the first demonstration at which more than a third of the population – almost 35% of the inhabitants of Aragon, including people of over 90 years old and babies of under a year – were present to demonstrate their rejection of the National Hydrological Plan. As a native of Aragon, I would ask you to communicate to Commissioner Wallström our gratitude for her willingness to enter into dialogue and her constant work. Nevertheless, this has not been the attitude of the Spanish Prime Minister. I would ask you to communicate to the Prime Minister, Mr Aznar, that we want him to change this intransigent and authoritarian position, and to sit down and talk to the legitimate representative of all Aragonese people, the Government of Aragon. Mr President, the overwhelming majority of Aragonese people do not want to be plundered. We therefore defend, and will continue to defend wherever necessary, our position of ‘no diversion’.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, in fact, it was I who made the proposal to turn an urgency procedure into a more general debate on globalisation, which was accepted by the Conference of Presidents. And I also made a proposal to remove the name of the company, to whom we are giving publicity, which appears in the title in parentheses. And that was the right thing to do, but here we are dealing with a different question, that is to say, a motion for a resolution was tabled which included, in its final point, a question almost of courtesy, and that was that the resolution was to be sent to the president of this company, and what has happened is that the transaction resolution which was presented, carried that name. And the question is very simple: those who are against this point being included in the resolution may ask for a separate vote. But what is not correct is that a motion for a resolution should be modified, once it is under way, in the corresponding body of Parliament, without the knowledge of the signatories. And this extends to another problem which has arisen in relation to the fisheries agreement, to which there has been a modification without the knowledge of the signatories. And I therefore ask the President for there to be rigorous control in the records in relation to the non-authorised modification of proposals, which I regard as a problem insofar as it concerns the modification and falsification of a Parliamentary public document. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Far from learning the lessons from the ecological and social crisis ravaging the planet, the Johannesburg Summit demonstrated the irresponsibility of the way in which States behave. The Bush administration is largely responsible for the deadlock in negotiations. But the European Union did not display any more will by confining itself strictly to the unacceptable decisions of Doha and Monterrey. If the EU really wanted to assist development in the South, it would abolish agricultural aid for exports, which bring products onto the markets at prices which defy any competition. The common agricultural policy still works on the basis of productivist thinking by multiplying surpluses. It is urgent that we re-orientate direct aid in order to promote sustainable agriculture. Against the widespread opening up of borders advocated by the WTO, the poor countries must be able to protect their agriculture by establishing tariff protections to stabilise internal prices. The need for funding in order to guarantee access to drinking water, to energy, to health and to transport is enormous. We must put an end to the stifling of public budgets by structural adjustment policies imposed by the IMF and cancel the external debt of the countries of the South. National States must regain their sovereignty in the definition of their development priorities. The resolution presented to Parliament does not take sufficient account of these issues and I have therefore abstained.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I should like to make a brief statement on an incident which occurred this morning at our group meeting. This particular group invited Mrs Andreassen to come and give evidence to us on a matter of technical information about the accounting systems. We found much to our surprise that when we arrived, she had been gagged by the Commission and was not allowed to give any information to either the assembled parliamentarians or the press present. What a clear majority of our political group would like to ask is whether the Commission can justify under what grounds Mrs Andreassen was gagged from giving us technical information about a substantive item which we need to know about. Perhaps more importantly, how is it that the framework agreement between the Commission and the Parliament does not now allow us as parliamentarians to talk to people about technical matters and how far, therefore, does the Commission reach into our institution? That is for our Bureau to decide and we would like to have clarity on that issue.

Political group: PPE-DE
The fact that, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia foundered, that its economy collapsed due to plundering by the nouveaux riches and the corrupt authorities, and that its people were plunged into poverty are problems that more often than not fail to cause European leaders any great concern. Now, however, the enlargement of the European Union towards the east means that a small area of this foundering Russia – the region of Kaliningrad – will be completely landlocked by two Member States. This will have implications in terms of pollution, trafficking in drugs, weapons and human beings. We suddenly find out that it is in the best interests of the EU to take an interest in this matter. How can it resolve these problems? The European Union does not, in fact, have a solution, and the report acknowledges this. It reiterates its fervent wishes as well as proposing to organise European-Russian border patrols on both sides of the border, in order to make it more difficult than at present for those who live there to cross the border. As for the subsidies that the EU is preparing to grant Kaliningrad, and which are designed to transform it into a ‘pilot region’ acting as a bridge between the EU and the rest of Russia, we all know that these will only be used to line the pockets of the local ruling mafiosi. (Explanation of vote cut short pursuant to Rule 137(1) of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, it was with great regret that I had to vote against the budget as I find the items devoted to improving the living conditions of the elderly and pensioners to be totally inadequate, or rather completely non-existent. I furthermore note that a significant proportion of these funds have been earmarked for the notorious Community action programmes. It is my opinion that these programmes fail to perform the beneficial role that they should in terms of the utilisation of Community funds. I believe that the European Union must completely reassess the way in which it spends the monies of the 15 Member States.

Political group: PPE-DE