GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Although the compromise that the European Parliament is proposing to the Council introduces some amendments to its proposal of 3 and 4 June (on tax issues and on privileges and immunities, for example), it retains aspects with which we disagree, such as fixing a monthly parliamentary salary that is the same for all Members, regardless of the country they represent. Whether or not to establish a statute for Members of the European Parliament is not the issue. The issue is its content. As we have stated, the Members of this House are elected to represent national constituencies. Consequently, they are, and must continue to be, bound to these constituencies. This means that the salary of a Member of the EP must be based on the salary paid to the Members of the national parliaments of the country in which they were elected. By the same token, we cannot ignore the existence of very different social realities in the countries of the EU. Providing a parliamentary salary that is the same for all EP Members will create situations of profound inequality and disparity in various countries, such as Portugal, between the salaries earned by workers and those earned by political representatives and holders of public office. This would be totally incomprehensible. Hence our vote against the report.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the matter I raised on Wednesday’s agenda is linked to the Council’s non-participation in the debate on the Nigerian elections, at which the Commission will be represented. We cannot understand why, when the Council is represented in the Chamber, it will not participate in a debate during which it just so happens that the Chairman of the Delegation of Observers, Mr Van den Berg, who was proposed for that appointment by the Council, is going to report. It is surprising that Council should not want to make a statement about such an important matter, even more so since it is represented in the Chamber. I ask you to repeat Parliament’s request that the Council participate in this debate.

Political group: PSE
Commissioner, you know that our party, the Communist Party of Greece, has raised the problem of the rights of the Russian-speaking minority in the Baltic States on numerous occasions. The situation is unacceptable. One third of the population in two of these three states does not have the right to be a citizen or, of course, to take part in the referendum on the accession of these countries to the European Union, and has no opportunity to study at university in their language and a series of other things. We have had no satisfactory answer from you or from the European Union in general and I really cannot understand how it is that you can show such sensitivity, for example, to the rights of Albanian speakers in Kosovo and can bomb Kosovo and bomb Serbia; how you can talk about the rights of a few opponents of the establishment in Cuba and have not the slightest interest in the policies, which I have no hesitation in calling dreamed-up neo-fascist policies, of the governments of the Baltic states. It is, in my opinion, an example of gross hypocrisy.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the tender fruit negotiation will be opened up in three days’ time, and we will then know if it is ripe or green, or sufficiently ripe for us all to feel calm and for both the parties concerned, the European Union and Morocco, to start sounding out methods of cooperation and agreements in a manner that is flexible, Commissioner, but also serious and rigorous, so that the Community fishing fleet may recommence its activities in those waters. As a Spanish and Andalusian MEP, I assert the rights of thousands of Andalusian and Spanish families to maintain and defend their jobs, which have been endangered for almost a year, and for us also to defend these jobs here in Parliament. But I would also like to appeal to the intelligence of the Kingdom of Morocco, which time and again has knocked on the door of the European Union and this Parliament in search of understanding and assistance in resolving its economic, social and political problems, of flexible cooperation and, I emphasise, also seriously, of arriving at an agreement that satisfies both parties. Commissioner, agriculture, immigration – a field with regard to which we approved a new budgetary line yesterday for assistance to Morocco –, industry and the economy form part of the set of mutual relations between Morocco and the European Union. It would be senseless to exclude fisheries from this and, precisely, the association agreement that links us to Morocco consists of not excluding any aspect that affects our interests, as the alternative would be to dull the impetus with which the European Union wants to, and can, promote the wholesale development of this country. This is the clear message which should also be sent to the Moroccans. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, a year ago Mr John Bolton, the Deputy US Secretary of State, said that the sole purpose of the International Criminal Court was to constrain American military power. Well, if we have to choose between might and right, we obviously have to defend the international legal order. The coming weeks will test the EU's support for the ICC, as the US is intensifying its efforts to obtain bilateral immunity agreements from third countries. We must support those countries which are coming under pressure. We must also monitor the situation and find out who is going to agree and who is going to resist. We do not have this information. Furthermore, we would still like to know what steps the Council is taking to guarantee that Iraqi prisoners will not be arbitrarily tried by US military courts, but judged by independent international tribunals, preferably under the auspices of the United Nations.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the actions of the European Union, the Commission and, in particular, Parliament, in their endeavour to regulate the tobacco industry, continue to give the impression that they are disregarding the needs of the workers and growers of the industry – and by the industry I mean the production, industrial and, in particular, tobacco-growing sections. You are all aware of how heated the debate in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy was. There have been a large number of amendments, including the one tabled by myself, attempting to defend the production sector and the tobacco-growing sector in particular. In Europe, 135 000 families work in the tobacco industry and it employs as many as 800 000 workers, most of whom are seasonal workers hired at harvest time and during production periods. This is a major industry which, moreover, hires more women than men to do seasonal work. Furthermore, from a production perspective, it would be very hard to change from growing tobacco to another crop. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has adopted an amendment withdrawing subsidies for European tobacco production. We are concerned as to whether this instrument will genuinely be an effective means of reducing tobacco consumption. The most immediate effect will be to weaken the situation of European tobacco-growers to the benefit of production elsewhere in the world, and the price reduction will penalise the entire production system of the European continent. Are we saying that, in order to reduce smoking in Europe, it is necessary to kill off European tobacco growers without even any guarantee that this will reduce cigarette consumption by a single cigarette? From where I stand, a responsible smoking reduction policy needs to be based on an awareness and prevention campaign, especially in schools. It should not penalise those who are contributing to Europe’s wealth.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it is strange to be debating Chechnya right now, as we are sending a delegation in a few days’ time to learn about the matter we are now asking and speaking about. This would indicate that we place no value on the information received from Russia. Russia has claimed that terrorists are also operating in Chechnya, but this is not widely accepted. It obviously cannot be true that everyone in Chechnya is a terrorist, which is what has also been said in Russia. However, when the United States of America began their campaign against terrorism we immediately gave them our support. As a result of some television publicity we believe there is anti-American terrorist activity even in a gorge between Russia and Georgia. Ladies and gentlemen: I have ten observations to make. This brutal war cannot be solved with weapons; even Russia now admits that. The war is part of numerous conflicts in the region; even these terrorists seem to come from the same sources. The conflicts could be eased through international mediation and I am working on the assumption that the delegation’s Executive Committee and our counterparts in the Duma will together try to look for political solutions. This is a political issue. The army’s violent clean-up operations in towns and villages must be ended immediately. The Russian army has not withdrawn because it trades illegally in oil and arms in the region. The Chechens must have their own police authority to expel the terrorists and mercenaries. A legal system must be created there, to bring the guilty to justice. The Chechens’ economy must be made transparent to avoid corruption. Human rights must be monitored; they cannot be violated claiming terrorism as an excuse. Relief organisations must be allowed into the region unhindered, and, finally, the Union must embark on the reconstruction of the region together with Russia and the Chechens.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am really sorry that we did not manage to conclude the debate this morning, as a rounded overview depended on it. I think that the Stockholm Summit set the wrong priorities. Too much social and education policy – matters which, according to the Treaties on European Union, are not its concern – and too little market liberalisation. The liberalisation of the energy markets was blocked by my country and by France. As for the liberalisation of air space, we are still wrangling over how to deal with Gibraltar airport, meaning that umpteen thousand tourists will again be left sitting in airports this summer due to delayed flights. And all the while, Stockholm was busy setting specifications for social and education policy! It is unacceptable. Europe is putting the cart before the horse. It needs to continue with its liberalisation policy so that the markets can develop in the consumers’ interest. This also qualifies as consumer and social policy because more competition means cheaper prices. As far as social and education policy per se are concerned, we should again abide strictly by the principle of subsidiarity and leave it to the Member States to put flesh on the bones of these concepts. Europe is not culturally homogenous, nor should it become so. Therein lies our strength because, on the contrary, Europe thrives on its diversity. I think that Europe should stop wasting its energy and should again focus on tasks which it is able to carry out. The next Council in Gothenburg in June will give the Heads of State or Government an opportunity to do so. I hope that they will make use of it for the good of Europe.

Political group: PPE-DE
On the pretext of fighting terrorism and the dangers inherent in deteriorating security, what we are seeing is the development and establishment of a huge, complex mechanism designed to limit freedoms, which could lead to the creation of a ‘fortress Europe’ in which this and other initiatives will be used as the reference point for the processing of personal data. In the case of Portugal, for example, the fact that Europol considers the territory of Portugal to be the main point of entry into Europe, combined with the extension of its mandate to fight terrorism and organised crime, would turn our country into an area in which this body would feel particularly free to persecute and monitor people, unconstrained by the national police, the Minister for Home Affairs or by any real democratic control over its actions by the Portuguese Parliament. These projects are intended to ensure cooperation between police forces, the information services and data filing systems, without any democratic control, under a restrictive and xenophobic immigration policy that infringes individual freedoms. As a matter of fact, if there is no democratic control over the Schengen Information System now, what would be the case with regard to the transmission of information to third countries and bodies, largely sponsored by Europol and the American agencies, on the pretext of fighting terrorism? Europol’s mandate must not take precedence over national policies or the control of Ministers for Home Affairs. Its activities with regard to each country must be listed in internal security reports. Europol must be subject, in all cases, to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and account for itself, in detailed reports, to the European Parliament. Any extension of Europol’s powers must, of course, be subject to prior debate by the European Parliament and by the national parliaments of the Member States.

Political group: GUE-NGL
While greeting all of the commissioners, especially those new ones, I have a question for Mr Romano Prodi. Mr President of the Commission, in its next term will the Commission, which you lead so well, consider some sort of more permanent European integration strategy for the Königsberg – Kaliningrad question? In your opinion, would it not be of value to Europe, and allow a better understanding of this region's historical position and problems, if it were proposed that the Culture Commissioners organise an international academic conference on the contribution of the two figures – Immanuel Kant and Mikhail Kalinin – to European culture?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to thank the Commission and Mr Cunha for their hard work. We in the British Conservative delegation reluctantly took the decision that we were unable to support the recommendations in the Cunha report. We see the need for reform, and the need for reform for our farmers. Therefore we cannot support horizontal or partial decoupling and as that was an integral part of Mr Cunha's report, we are unable to support that. However, we support the Commission in its legislative resolution and want the Council to come to an agreement as soon as it possibly can. We believe that the Commission's proposals are along the right lines. I would add that Mr Cunha is an esteemed Member of this House; he is also a personal friend. However, we believe, and I personally believe, that farmers need security. Mr Cunha's report would probably mean a second reform and we could not accept it.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, when we talk about asylum, we must point out that we are talking about a right which assists any person with a justified fear of persecution and that international law, Community law and internal legislations legally oblige the European Union and its Member States to respect that right. And it is essential that the institution of the right to asylum is not affected by the crisis currently facing the asylum system, possibly as a result of abuses of its use. I would like to congratulate the institutions because, finally, five years after the Tampere European Council, we are tackling the creation of a European asylum system which must involve common standards for reception, the processing of applications and assistance for asylum seekers. The European Union should, firstly, adapt the conditions in which asylum seekers are currently received to Europe's own standards in terms of individual rights and guarantees, hygiene and welfare. Secondly, we should take this opportunity to adapt to the current reality and include amongst cases granted asylum those of women and children threatened with genital mutilation, child soldiers and the victims of new forms of slavery. As draftsman of the opinion for the Committee on Development and Cooperation, I am pleased that the improvement of asylum systems and the possible establishment of a common European system is not being carried out from a policing point of view, but also by taking account of political aspects and the development and human rights problems which are at the root of both asylum applications and the mass economic migration which is sometimes disguised as asylum. The Commission's approach should include measures for creating systems of freedoms which respect human rights in the countries of origin, and the establishment of the essential security conditions in neighbouring countries. This would reduce the pressure from genuine asylum seekers at European borders. For bogus asylum seekers, the tendency for economic migrants to use the institution of asylum can only be stopped if we fund cooperation projects in the countries of origin which offer prospects for development. For a long time the Socialist Group has supported co-development measures, in other words, specific development of the places of origin of migration in order to facilitate return and discourage immigration or the abuse of asylum. I hope that the next Parliament will have the opportunity to give its opinion on the definitive establishment of a common asylum system.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as you suggested this may seem something of an obscure and even idiosyncratic issue to reach the floor of the European Parliament. For the Reverend Owen, however, it is anything but obscure. It is his livelihood, his home and I suspect even more than that, it is his belief that right will be done, that justice will prevail. It would seem that the legal system cannot defend him, although he has done no wrong. Increasingly, I fear that appeals to a moral principle do not work, although one might have hoped that within the Church of England, and I am myself a communicant member of that church, such an appeal might get some countenance. I am afraid that once the lawyers of the consistory courts don their wigs and gowns it is the letter of the law that will prevail, rather than moral justice and still less Christian spirit. I hope the publicity of this case is making the bishops of the Church of England feel just a little ashamed. If the Church cannot set an example of Christian charity, understanding and fair treatment towards its servants, who can? The Church should not be surprised if its pews are increasingly empty. It is a clear tribute to the democratic procedures of this House, and to the work of the Petitions Committee, that the Reverend Owen has at last found one public body which is at least ready to listen, one that does not require expensive lawyers. I trust that His Grace, the new Archbishop of Canterbury will carefully consider this small and obscure case and show that the Church has not totally lost its belief in Christian charity, and might accord to his rector the rights that other European citizens enjoy as employees.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would thank the Council of Ministers for its answer. I want to ask two follow-up questions connected with the taxation of ourselves as parliamentarians. My basic view is that one ought to pay tax in the country in which one lives, in which one’s family lives and in which one benefits from public services. I intended to ask the presidency if there really is an argument for saying that we should not pay tax in our own countries just as other people do. Is there any argument for our being given a special privilege just because we are parliamentarians? That is my first question. My second question is about whether the Portuguese Presidency can accept a solution which involves the tax issue’s being solved in different ways for Members of different nationalities, or whether you want a solution which is identical for members of all nationalities.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the world economy is now facing problems similar to those it faced before the beginning of the Uruguay Round 13 years ago. We are confronted with generally slackening growth, and that in a world with an exploding population There are six billion people in the world; one billion are hungry; and more than 30 million people die of starvation each year, including – horrifically – many children. And we, the rich of this world, have a duty to try to reduce this misery and hunger. I am firmly convinced that a further liberalisation and expansion of trade in the framework provided by the WTO will contribute to promoting growth and employment in the developing countries as well. As general rapporteur of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection for the WTO negotiations, I should particularly like to thank Mr Schwaiger for his clear words on the subject of trade and the environment. It was not straightforward. But if, by the end of tomorrow, Parliament has accepted the Schwaiger Report, then we shall have endorsed his words and decided that account must be taken of environmental protection as a condition for all areas of world trade; not a wishy-washy may or ought to be, but must be. I believe we are heading for very exciting negotiations indeed and, as has been said very often today, we Europeans most certainly have an historic role to play in these.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, on a point of order. May I ask you to ask the President of this Parliament to note that a vote took place here yesterday for a full inquiry into foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom. The vote for that was carried because the British Labour Government refused my constituents an inquiry into that terrible disease. In this Parliament yesterday the British Socialists ... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we have a unique opportunity today to bind the bulk of Europe into a single political entity for the first time. We must not deny this opportunity to the peoples of Europe, for all the people of this continent are entitled to attain freedom, peace and prosperity within a political community – and I stress the words ‘political community’ – almost 15 years after the collapse of Communism. My home country of Austria has the longest common border with the acceding nations. I know what the Iron Curtain meant, and I am also well aware of what an external border of the European Union means today for those on both sides of the border. I myself am descended from Czech and Hungarian grandparents. I was born in Austria, only a few miles from Bratislava, the capital of modern Slovakia. I could just as easily have been born on the other side of the Iron Curtain, in which case I should have enjoyed far fewer opportunities than have been granted me in my life. Even though the governments of some EU Member States have made it difficult for me through their illegal actions in relation to Parliament, and even though many of the applicant countries’ governments have made it difficult for me by supporting an illegal war, I shall cast an unequivocal ‘yes’ vote, just like all the other Social Democrats from Austria, for I am convinced that the door to the European Union must be opened to the peoples of Eastern Europe and of Cyprus, though it is still divided, and Malta. And with the same conviction we shall pursue the dialogues that still need to be conducted, whether they relate to the Beneš decrees, to nuclear power stations like Temelin or to other power stations, secure in the knowledge that the pursuit of this dialogue benefits both sides, for enlargement is not a zero-sum game. We shall emerge as winners, and so will the new Member States. If European solidarity ever meant anything, it means something in this vote today. (Applause)

Political group: PSE