GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Madam President, I would like to make a few comments on texts that I think are somewhat ambiguous. Firstly although the largest terrorist attacks in the last year have taken place in New York and Bali, it would be interesting to consider what Europe’s response would have been if the original attack that drew our attention to the scale of terrorism, that of 11 September 2001, had taken place in Europe; if the aeroplanes, instead of flying into the twin towers in New York, had flown into the Eiffel Tower, the buildings of the European Parliament or any other major European building. Perhaps such self-examination would have given us a greater insight into the ambiguities and the difficulties we face in dealing with the phenomenon of terrorism, which we have not yet entirely renounced. The second aspect that I should like to mention – in addition to praising the Council’s intention to maintain close cooperation with the United States in this field – is that, in fact, and this is an important point, terrorism has little to do with poverty. Poor people are clearly involved in terrorist actions, but those directing operations are not poor. And if we look at the world as a whole, the poorest people are not involved in the phenomenon of terrorism: Africa would be the main source of terrorist acts if a correlation really existed between terrorism and poverty. But this is not the case! Terrorism is a phenomenon that contains a political rationale requiring the achievement of certain aims and also requires a degree of power. And this does not, of course, come from the poorest, or at least not directly from the poorest. Lastly, I should like to refer to something Commissioner Patten said, quoting Popper. The problem we face today is also one that Popper raised: it is not so much the tension between the need to preserve freedoms and our perception of what the security and defence of free society means, but our inability and unwillingness to believe in the moral superiority of democracy and of freedom. Furthermore, on the basis of this concept, which is fundamental to our civilisation and which is longed for by the peoples of the entire world, in particular the poor, perhaps we should be able and willing to act against terrorism. Unfortunately, some ambiguities in Europe today are preventing us from doing so.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, is what we have ideal? I do not think so. However, in the current circumstances, this is the best we can commit to paper, in my view. It is always easy to draft a series of standards just for the European Union, making them so strict in the process that while we may be happy with them, they may make it impossible for the average company to operate. We had the choice. We held a debate on whether to opt for an international, global or European solution. Given the present circumstances, we made a sensible choice. Moreover, it is on the strength of what we said that this strict standard was copied internationally. If all Member States have accepted this standard within the ICAO, it seems necessary to me that we, as a Community institution, ensure that this standard becomes law in the Union. I, for one, support this principle, and I think that the rapporteurs, both those of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism and those of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy have done sterling work. As I belong to both these committees, I do not feel the ambivalence which some fellow MEPs do feel. I feel happy on both sides. This is also because the directive offers the necessary flexibility, since a system has been provided for which allows for an individual approach tailored to each airport, so that measures can be selected within a European framework. This, at least, guarantees a certain level of equality in the treatment of people who suffer from noise pollution. In the final analysis, this is the whole object of the exercise: to ensure that people are affected as little as possible and to reconcile – at least up to a certain degree – two aspects which are, in fact, irreconcilable. Although the review after five years will involve a tightening up of legislation, there is, in my opinion, no need to establish a limit at this stage. This would be very unwise, in my view, and it could, in fact, undermine the entire proposal, which would be a very bad development, for we need to move forward quickly. Parliament must, therefore, approve this proposal, so that there is a legislative document by 1 April, upon which we can withdraw the hushkits directive. For this we must take another look at Article 5(1), and we are in agreement on this. This is what we are planning to do, and I should like to ask the Commissioner whether she could not ensure that a uniform, Community method of measurement be established for this kind of noise, for that is still not available. In my view, you should draft a bill on how noise is measured, so that we can establish objectively how measurements are to be carried out, applicable to every airport uniformly. This initiative would also benefit the joint discussion on this issue.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, given the late hour, the fact that we are behind schedule and the difficulty that Members are going to have negotiating the traffic to reach the airport, there is a danger that there will not be enough of us left to vote on the last reports on the agenda. In agreement with the rapporteur, Mr Zappalà, our group proposes that the vote on this report be postponed and that it be put to the vote as the first item of voting time on the Wednesday of the next Strasbourg part-session. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the van den Burg report on prudential supervision in the European Union is particularly interesting for the elderly and pensioners, who give their money both to the State which arranges their pensions, through compulsory national insurance schemes, and to private funds, through shares, bonds and investments. Neither, however, are completely watertight. To avoid this problem, all we can do, as I saw just now when I closed my eyes, is to undertake to build brick houses. In my view and in the view of the Pensioners’ Party, this is the best investment we can make for the future, in whichever part of the world they are built.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, the nicest compliment that can paid to Mr Ruffolo, I think, is to ask a question which, to my mind, is the most significant, the question of the budget. If he tells us that 0.1% of the Community budget is set aside for culture, when we know full well that a Europe of Culture is advancing, how much is coming from the European Structural Funds, as Mrs O'Toole stated? What I would like to know, and I think Mr Ruffolo would also like to know, is what are the European Structural Funds set aside for culture, what this represents and what this means for a Europe of Culture currently under construction. If this Europe of Culture is effectively under construction, then let us take on board all of Mr Ruffolo’s proposals: it could be that he is proposing to change the Treaty by proposing a cultural observatory. Perhaps we could also propose a cultural policy, and I would really like to know your feelings on reinforced cooperation, on the extension of the qualified majority, in short, on all that could be used to build a cultural policy in Europe in a concrete and non-abstract fashion. Mrs Echerer told us no long debates, and I agree with her, of course, but I must say that as far as I am concerned there should be a clear description of budgetary expenditure on culture. We know very well that wherever we go in Europe, we find out that it is not such and such a programme that provides the appropriate financing but these often talked about Structural Funds. Why can we not find out what is happening with these Structural Funds? This would perhaps be the best proof and the best argument if those Members who are not interested in culture are to support us in our cultural project.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, first of all, I am pleased that the Katiforis report takes into consideration the multitude of factors responsible for the deterioration of the marine environment: pollution, unsupervised fishing, drilling platforms and pressure from the increasing use of coastal areas for urban development are potential sources of widescale damage to the environment in both coastal areas and offshore, and fishing is also a victim of this situation. There is therefore a need for an in-depth analysis of the relationship between fishing and the environment. The use of selective fishing gear which reduces incidental unwanted catches and limits the throwing of unwanted fish back into the sea is certainly essential, as is a reduction of the pressure from the fishing industry offshore, as well as in coastal waters. A reduction in the fishing capacity and in pressure from the fishing industry on fish stocks is not necessarily compatible with maintaining an outdated fleet and would limit modernisation. In addition to providing more appropriate conditions of safety and hygiene, the use of more modern vessels could also contribute to reducing certain major factors. Moreover, it is important to uphold the concept that it is not possible to make a surface categorisation of entire fishing sections as more environmentally friendly: in reality, in some cases, small-scale fishing has less of an impact on the environment and natural resources. I am also pleased that the report takes into consideration the possibility of starting a campaign for informing fishermen and consumers of the risks of exploiting fishing resources, and I also welcome the Commission’s request to propose the institution of a European award to be given to different categories of the industry and to all those who provide services and advice regarding responsible behaviour, in order to further the sustainable management of fish stocks and the conservation of marine life.

Political group: PSE
Commissioner, I share your care and concern to improve the system and you have our support. I have two real – not rhetorical – questions. You said that often there are no common concepts or common definitions and that often we do not have the support on the ground which we need in order to conduct a proper investigation. Who is stopping you? I think that this is not just a national question. There are also political aspects which I do not expect you to take completely in hand, but they are there. I also have a second question, which relates to this and the previous debate. Wars do not only kill children; they also leave them orphaned or in poverty, which are traumatic experiences, and there are other aspects and I should like to ask if you are honestly addressing them. For example, we have seen sexual abuse of children by our soldiers, soldiers of the European Union, in Somalia and elsewhere. There is a huge campaign in Bosnia and Kosovo to prostitute children, young children, both boys and girls. Is there anything you can do about this?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, it was not until the end of 2002 that the Commission adopted an Action Plan aimed at ensuring the sustainability of fishing in the Mediterranean. One might say that it was not before time, and Mr Lisi’s excellent own-initiative report emphasises the various positive aspects of this plan, at the same time highlighting those points that seem to him to be inadequate, or those that seem to him to be the most important. Thus he points out, rightly, that before any restrictive measures are adopted, more in-depth studies should be carried out, leading to a precise evaluation of the current situation in the Mediterranean fishing areas. That evaluation should tackle every aspect of fishing activity, including its biological, economic, social, technological, cultural and even anthropological aspects. Such an evaluation would also have to be on-going. Mr Lisi, also following the Commission’s plan, emphasises, again rightly, the fact that the Mediterranean ecosystem has a certain unity, which means that the issue has to be dealt with on a multilateral basis. There are currently six Member States bordering on the Mediterranean, if we take into account the accession of Malta and Cyprus, and that means that the Union will carry very considerable weight in any future negotiations. That can be demonstrated in the context of the Barcelona process. Permit me to remind you that it was in Barcelona that the first congress was held, in 1999, on maritime technological innovations and research. The report emphasises the need for consultation with the people who are involved in fishing, who have organised themselves, and done a good job of it. They have modernised their fleet, and have adapted to change. All these efforts must be taken into account. They have often – almost always – done it with the aid of regional or autonomous authorities. That is the case in Catalonia and, I would say, in all the Catalan regions. It is important, therefore, that any regulatory action is taken in close consultation with the fishermen themselves, the institutions that they have formed, and the local, regional and autonomous authorities.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, any decisions taken with regard to consumer protection must pay due attention to the expectations and hopes, and also the fears, of the 425 million consumers in the enlarged Union. In its legislative acts, Parliament has the duty of taking the complexities and future effects of consumer protection into account, as well as the risks associated with it. The reports on the future of European consumer protection policy meet this demand whilst also demanding that an end be put to the lack of discipline in relations with consumers. Many people see the provisions in the areas of food safety, services, health and safety as having already lost their moral innocence in the face of market developments. There is a great need for action, for example, in order to put a stop to abuses in the area of telecommunications and for reforms in competition law and in the field of financial services to protect consumers. Giving life to the right of initiative for the consumers' benefit demands that a permanent place be found for consumer protection in the public advice and consultation system, as well as education and, above all, more information. Consumer protection has to protect people against fraud, health hazards, and financial loss. The principle of effectiveness applies to consumer protection as much as it does to anything else, but there must be no gain in efficiency to the detriment or disadvantage of consumers. I therefore endorse the demand that complete harmonisation of the legal provisions be restricted to what are manifestly special cases, subject, however, to the condition that this principle is not misused and that minimum standards will be deregulated.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, with the discharge procedure for 1999, the Commission and Parliament opened up a new approach, characterised by greater institutional cooperation. It is the Commission that deserves praise for this result, but also the rapporteur, Freddy Blak, for having managed this procedure with determination, common sense and intelligence. We are undeniably seeing progress in the field of agriculture, not least as a result of the implementation of the integrated management and control system, but it is equally true that no progress has been made in the monitoring of fraud in the food industry. This situation is paradoxical: a deviation by half a meter in the route of a tractor working the land or the replacement of a milk cow on a date that is not considered to be in accordance with the regulations can lead to a declaration of financial irregularities and corrections by means of statistical projection. Nevertheless, fraud in the food industry committed in order to obtain export subsidies is rarely monitored and when it is, cases of fraud often disappear within the labyrinthine processes of national justice systems, and do not result in Community sanctions or a public explanation of the facts. This is a state of affairs that we cannot accept.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the impression which our citizens have gleaned from the European Council of Ghent is rather chaotic: a closed down city, three major countries making prior arrangements, an angry Belgian President, disparate final declarations by Heads of Government and, to finish off, an angry Commission President. At a time when unity of action is vital, Europe is divided. I should like to make three observations. The United Kingdom, Germany and France have lent their full support to the United States. In fact, the UK is even granting active military support. I welcome this. Other EU countries that are also members of NATO are providing more passive support. The EU countries that are not NATO members lend political support via diplomatic channels. These are three different kinds of support without any clear interrelation for the citizen. And then the EU President asked for an evaluation. So you, in fact, put a seed of doubt into our minds as to whether that support would last. Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that the United States is seeking support from countries outside the European Union, including Canada, Australia and the Pacific Association. I would call for more coordination in Europe’s support for the actions against terrorism in the coming months, so that the image of division will soon be one of the past. Secondly, I should like to comment on cooperation in the field of internal security. Commissioner Vitorino has tabled the proposals extremely promptly, and these include one about a European regulation against money laundering, one concerning arrest warrants and one harmonising penalties. In fact, those proposals had already partly been tabled. Last week, the Council of Ministers for Internal Affairs failed to reach agreement. That was also the case for the European Council in Ghent. Why did the Heads of Government fail to make those executive decisions? Surely it is hardly justifiable vis-à-vis the citizens for the EU to be undecided about anti-terrorism measures at home. Then there is the convention, which receives my support, because the Council has adopted the wish of the European Parliament and my group for a convention with a broad parliamentary basis. We are less happy about the proposal to ask the convention to supply options. That is the type of question you might ask a consultancy bureau, but not a parliamentary body. Let the convention determine its own working method and submit its own proposals. That worked for the Charter and, in my opinion, will work again now.

Political group: PPE-DE
The markets being shared out within the WTO between the monopolies and the heavyweights are not restricted to industrial and agricultural products; they also encompass services. Discussions on the conditions for allowing foreign capital to move into transport, telecommunications, energy, banking services, water distribution, health, education and culture are drawing to a close, in a total lack of transparency, in complete keeping with the principle that everything can be bought and sold. The target: the less developed countries, which the multinationals are ready to bleed dry and the necessary precondition: the privatisation and liberalisation of any remaining public sectors. The Communist Party of Greece is radically opposed to this process. We condemn the greed of the monopolies, the plundering of national wealth, the savage exploitation of the workers, with miserable working conditions and attacks on social benefits. We also condemn the hypocrisy of all those proclaiming that the liberalisation of trade, the opening up of the markets and the abolition of all obstacles to the unaccountability of big business will lead to development. We defend public ownership and administration of the basic sectors of the economy, both in our own country and in every country of the world, and we are fighting for a quality public health service and state education and for the unimpeded development of civilisation, with respect for each nation’s individual characteristics.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, initially our Group did not fully understand the need to table this motion for a resolution on events which seemed to be a local phenomenon. However, the incidents in El Ejido are a symptom of a phenomenon which is present throughout Europe and which deserves our full attention. We thought we had eradicated the terror of intolerance which racism had unleashed in Europe. Yet, over the years, social disintegration in Europe has been combining with an increase in migration from surrounding countries and increased awareness of human rights to develop into this climate of racism and intolerance. This is why what seemed to be a local and isolated phenomenon in El Ejido is actually a worrying symptom which is coinciding with the emergence of parties like Haider’s. This House therefore proposes the adoption of urgent measures encompassing all the relevant factors and to be applied immediately. We must ensure respect for human rights, tolerance and multiculturalism and we must obtain an increase in budgets and action lines for social and health issues. In this respect we must not forget that the original victim’s attacker was suffering from a mental illness for which he had been inadequately treated. The current difficulties must also be taken into account so that this town can adopt the necessary measures, as indicated previously. Finally, as our Nobel Prize Winner, José Saramago, has said, we are all in each other and as Jesus Christ said, although Saramago disagreed with this, we should not just love one another, more importantly, we should respect one another.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, there is no dispute that the European Union is contributing to the war on poverty, but, as we all know, we fall a long way short of our declared objectives. The removal of poverty, backwardness and ignorance must be first on the list if we are to combat terrorism. A new world economic order and a new kind of politics are on the agenda – things that were called for by the more than 60 000 participants in the Second World Social Forum in Porto Alegre. Argentina is a shocking illustration of where neoliberalism will take us. Those who want to provide really effective development aid should not close their ears to the message from Porto Alegre, but actively involve those democratic forces that are active in that forum, in the brainstorming process and in the implementation of a new politics of development.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Yesterday, Mr President, I closed my eyes for a moment to think about how I should explain my vote in favour of the Bowis report on disease prevention and control. With my eyes closed, I saw that Mr Bowis, in the next legislative period, had become EU Commissioner for Health and, with his usual commitment and professional ability, had succeeded in obtaining a huge financial and organisational undertaking to prevent a good many diseases for EU citizens, thus reducing health expenditure across Europe, as well as disability pensions, without needing to reduce the budget for pensions and so harm pensioners. This is why – with the hope that this really happens– I voted in favour of his report.

Political group: PPE-DE