GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, the document we are about to adopt contains, in my opinion, points that might seem contradictory. We reiterate our support for the government of South Africa but, at the same time, we ask it to make greater efforts in a number of areas, such as improving the living standards of the black population, reducing inequalities, creating employment, respecting minorities, fighting crime, and preventing and treating AIDS. By putting pressure on the South African authorities in this way, we are on the one hand covering up the responsibility which many of our countries and the so-called ‘western world’ should be assuming for the colossal injustice that the South Africans had to start from in the democratic reconstruction of their society. On the other hand, it seems that we are giving the message that those who are in power there are not doing everything they can to put an end to the problems we are pointing out, and that conclusion would be another injustice on our part. These are the priorities of the Pretoria government, and trying to overcome these problems is what makes that country an acceptable model for the whole of southern Africa. I believe it is vital to emphasise that we understand the effort that South Africa is making, often in a courageous and innovative manner, with significant victories such as the one it has just gained in the matter of AIDS, for instance, against the great pharmaceutical industry. Furthermore, however, I should like to remind you that I was the rapporteur last year when we debated the trade, development and cooperation agreement with South Africa, and I do not remember from this debate that the European Union was over-generous with our contribution to increasing the South African government’s ability to overcome all these major challenges. Now we are the ones who are demanding that they should be more effective. Of course, we must remain vigilant, but without forgetting the serious difficulties that South Africa is facing, and of course we must turn our concerns into supportive cooperation to give the South Africans a better chance to achieve their objectives, which, moreover, coincide with our own demands.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, President-in-Office of the Council, I should like to congratulate Prime Minister Persson on an ambitious and results-oriented programme. I hope it means that the EU will take several steps forward and that it will also reinforce the image of the EU in Sweden. Among the issues closest to people’s hearts, one of the most important nowadays is that of food safety. I have noted that the Prime Minister has expressed his hesitancy about eating meat in view of the ways in which animals and meat products are treated. Despite the fact that I am an old farmer and an inveterate meat-eater, I can nowadays understand people who feel like that. Parliament will be adopting positions on some eighty food safety directives. We are now beginning to discuss the proposal for a European food authority. I would be interested to hear what the Prime Minister’s attitude is to such an authority. In a common market, common rules and regulations as well as common controls, and – if the rules are not followed – a common system of sanctions are required. Such an overall solution requires more than the proposed food authority. My opinion is that it has to function in cooperation with the EU’s Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin and with the Commission. Within the sphere of influence of such a triangle, advice and consultation, risk assessment, risk management and sanctions could be dealt with within the framework of existing regulatory mechanisms and could provide an identical level of food safety throughout the Union. I hope to have the support of the presidency for this idea.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I would like to join Mr Dupuis and Mrs Iivari in expressing our sense of deep solidarity with Lao exiles who are here today, and even more with dissidents who are detained in prison without trial and in intolerable circumstances in Laos itself. On behalf of the Group of the who are in Parliament – and, I am sure, in a spirit in which the whole Parliament joins – we very much wish to express our support for the liberation of Laos. We cannot but remember here how much the West – the United States perhaps more than Europe – has done, in times past, to destabilise and damage life there. We now wish to see an improvement. We know that Laos has signed the UN Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic and Social Rights. It still must ratify them, and the government there must live up to what it has undertaken to honour. We call for this to be done in the name of human liberty and solidarity.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as has already been said, this proposal sees us continuing a tradition of this House. We have, in the past, been very thorough in campaigning for a reduction in the emission of pollutants from motors, and now we want to deal with stationary apparatus and mobile machines, an area that has not hitherto been covered. Combating these pollutants, or actually reducing them, has no profound influence on potential pollution overall, but it is significant, in that these machines and pieces of apparatus are highly localised and are generally in use for a considerable period of time. This results in heavy local pollution, which is detrimental – particularly through particulates and nitrogen oxides – to people’s health. This is something we should constantly bear in mind. I can tell Mr Lange that we should be rather more cautious here, and that this is where we should not allow ourselves to be misled into presenting specific technical solutions as especially effective in reducing the emission of pollutants. Not only do we have to cut pollutants, but we also have to think about reducing CO2 in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol. We know that installing filters increases the output of CO2. This, surely, is where a compromise has to be found, so that, while calling for a reduction, we nonetheless have to keep asking ourselves to what extent we have to approach this problem only from this direction. I can agree with the specification that the rapporteur has proposed, and we should continue to take this robust line. I can remember how, in 1998, it was prophesied that Europe’s oil sector would collapse; yet it ended up being quicker off the mark than the timescale we had proposed. Our approach is without doubt the right one. I am rather more cautious about extending this to railways and boats, where I am sure that there are still some open questions. We are attempting to move more goods on to rails and boats. We also know that public transport also has to be covered – a sector that makes particular use of rail vehicles. These, though, produce pollutants, and it is on these that we want to impose rules. We will have to re-examine this. That is why the proposal is right to include such vehicles; had it not done so, approving it would have been a bit more difficult. This way, we can agree on a common denominator.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Graça Moura, for all the work he has done on this report. I believe it is vitally important to provide greater numbers of citizens with access to culture. Schools, for good reason, must play a very important role in this regard, although I must also say that I completely agree with the Commission that this is not just the responsibility of the schools. It is also the responsibility of families. It is also vital that children have the opportunity to know what surrounds them, both at local and at regional level, at national level and at European level. This is where we have to be much more involved and play a more important role. In Spain we often get the impression that children have little knowledge of their national culture, let alone of European culture. We all know that it is important that children identify with their city, their town, their region and their country, but it also important – without in any way undervaluing what other speakers have said – that children have some sense of identity as Europeans, and this is one of the objectives that we here must fight for. It is difficult for us to feel European if we do not know Europe, and knowing it means being aware of its history, its geography, its economy, its literature, its philosophy, and also its sports. It would be very positive if this could be a common subject in all the schools in all the Member States, and also if we could promote student exchanges more so that what they learn they learn in situ. We often say in my country that a picture is worth more than a thousand words. I would like to say finally that it is essential that the educational services of museums, theatres, libraries, etc. which are available to the public, are available in more than one official language of the European Union. And if possible in several, so that we can all identify with what we are going to read. Of course, all of the things we are talking about tonight cannot be carried out unless there is the Community budget to do so, and this is going to be our first great battle and we must fight for it.

Political group: PPE-DE
I can only welcome the drafting of the Convention on the Future of Europe and its work, which represents an historic milestone in the process of European integration. I welcome the concern to bring the Union closer to the citizens, enhance its democratic character and improve its decision-making capacity, in the context of enlargement. I welcome the (admittedly rather unambitious) enhancement of the Union’s role and its capacity for action on the world stage, bearing in mind the challenges of globalisation and growing interdependence. I welcome the fact that, for the first time in the history of European integration, national parliaments will have an active role in drawing up European legislation. The Union has acquired legal personality, and the longed-for disappearance of the pillar structure has become a reality. I welcome the appeal contained in Mr Gil-Robles’s excellent report that the citizens of Europe be called upon to give their opinion in a referendum, preferably on the same day as the European Parliament elections. I regret the disappearance of the rotating Presidency of the Council and the omission of any reference to our common cultural and historical roots.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this is the last explanation of vote of the part-session and if, with my foot broken and in plaster, I succeed in getting to the end of this last explanation as well, I shall have some hope of not having put my foot in it too often. That said, I want to tell you that I consulted my daughter Elisabetta about this report. She is a young lawyer and also a regional assembly member for the Pensioners’ Party in Lombardy. Her advice as a lawyer was to vote for the report as it stood, because it would mean more cases and lawsuits. But as a legislator and assembly member, she said she should do, and advised me to do, what was best for the citizens, and vote for it only if it was amended. And that is what I have done, Mr President.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to spring to Mr Posselt's aid. There have been other precedents, dangerous precedents, which were agreed by plenary. The mere fact that plenary has decided something does not mean that it is not a dangerous precedent. (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Report (A5-0141/2003) by Mr Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler, on behalf of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, on the proposal for a Council directive on Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease and amending Directive 92/46/EEC (COM(2002) 736 – C5-0029/2003 – 2002/0299(CNS)) (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) *** Proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of an agreement in the form of a letter between the European Community and the Republic of Croatia on the ecopoint system applicable to Croatian transit traffic through Austria [COM(03) 121 – C5-0215/03 – 2003/0051(CNS)] (Parliament adopted the proposal for a decision) *** Joint motion for a resolution(1) on the ministerial meeting of the European Space Agency on 27 May 2003 (Parliament adopted the joint resolution) *** Joint motion for a resolution(2) on the search made of the Ankara headquarters of the Human Rights Association of Turkey (Parliament adopted the joint resolution) *** Joint motion for a resolution(3) on the preparation for the EU-Russia Summit (St Petersburg, 31 May 2003) (Parliament adopted the joint resolution) *** Report (A5-0126/2003) by Mr Margrietus J. van den Berg, on behalf of the Committee on Development and Cooperation, on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on education and training in the context of poverty reduction in developing countries [COM(2002) 116 – C5-0333/2002 – 2002/2177(COS)] (Parliament adopted the resolution) *** Motion for a resolution (B5-0238/2003) on the protection of audio-visual performers Before the vote

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, according to UNICEF, 200 000 children are traded annually in West and Central Africa. Poor families in debt give their children on loan to the creditors as deposit, or to pay off their loans. However, because they cannot get out of the red, the children are often sold and moved to other countries. There they are used as household helps, unpaid workers on cocoa or cotton plantations, or employed in the sex industry. Child traffickers rarely get caught or punished. The discovery of the Nigerian ship Etireno in the port of Cotonou is probably only the thin end of the wedge. The international labour organisation estimates that there are 250 million child slaves worldwide. Surely it is unacceptable that practices such as trafficking in children and slavery still exist, and even thrive, in the twenty-first century. We should therefore put more mechanisms in place to track down and punish the trade in and use of child slaves. The legal apparatus in situ should be given far more resources and be better equipped to fight malpractices of this kind, and multinational companies must abide by the moral code not to abuse children for commercial purposes. At the same time, we must have the courage to tackle the underlying causes: poverty and unemployment. Let us hope that the pledge of debt discharge which was made at the Conference of the Least Developed Countries in Brussels this week is kept, and that our markets will at long last be opened up to agricultural products from those countries, so that we can give those people something to sell other than their children.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would like to focus in my speech on Mrs Lalumière’s report, which I think is clearly worded and well put together. The decision taken at the Helsinki summit to establish a rapid reaction force has been interpreted in different ways by the Member States. In Finland and Sweden they speak about crisis management, which in these countries chiefly means a traditional peacekeeping operation. Mrs Lalumière’s report reflects the thinking of many NATO countries, according to which a rapid reaction force would very quickly develop into a fully-fledged army capable of warfare. It would have at its disposal, among other things, heavy transport aircraft, aircraft carriers, cruise missiles, and in-flight refuelling for long-distance bombing missions. The Finnish people have not been told anything about this. In my opinion, Europe’s military identity should have been established in the context of NATO, then the EU could just stick to the task of crisis management. I cannot approve of the EU becoming a military alliance and a military superpower. Now that the development of the EU’s military dimension has begun, it is wise to aim for a situation where the Union should be internally differentiated in this area also. The NATO countries could form a defence organisation within the framework of the Union that would function as a strong European pillar of NATO. In this way other EU Member States could keep to their traditional peacekeeping activities. I cannot accept certain details of Mrs Lalumière’s report, and in the final vote I shall support its rejection.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, much has been said of the evil and immoral behaviour of Saddam Hussein and rightly so, but I want to focus on the European Union and indeed on one Member State in particular, my own, the United Kingdom. Mr Blair made it clear yesterday that he will support the US in a war on Iraq, without waiting until other options have been explored and without seeking a fresh UN Security Council resolution. In a press conference yesterday, he implicitly backed the principle of pre-emptive action on Iraq, saying that the simple restoration of weapons inspectors into Iraq may not be sufficient to avert war. We cannot enforce international law by breaking international law. A war on Iraq in these circumstances would be immoral, illegal, dangerous and wrong. Much has been said about the importance of the EU having a common front and a common voice and I agree with that. In that case I urge the Commission, the Council and all other EU Heads of State to do all they can to help us restrain their fellow EU Member State.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I am concerned about a number of aspects in the Langen report. Initially we have to address this question of services of general interest from the point of view of the rights of citizens, for the rights of consumers are a subset of those rights. Citizenship confers rights which entitle one to various essential needs such as water, which is essential to human life. Water cannot be treated within the European Union simply as a commodity to be bought and sold. Europe is committed to the idea of a distinct social model based on solidarity. It is therefore essential that we have a legal framework, a regulatory framework, within which the Commission and Member States can address the question of competition as it affects social services, public services, and services of general interest. It is part of a democratic agenda for the European Union to ensure that we are accountable, that the services we provide are accountable, and that we have a Europe which is developed as a socially inclusive Europe. The economy has to be an instrument to serve the people, not simply to serve the market. Rights of the consumer being defined on the basis of purchasing power is not an adequate way to develop a cohesive social Europe. It is a Europe where politics is denigrated because it is simply based on people's capacity to buy or not to buy.

Political group: PSE
I apologise, Mr President, to you and my fellow Members, but as shadow rapporteur it is my duty to keep an eye on the little standard procedure that remains in this vote. If I am not mistaken, you made us vote on paragraphs 1 to 14, but paragraph 12 has been declared inadmissible, in so far as it contains the two petitions that no Committee on Petitions has ever presented to our committee. Paragraph 12, therefore, must absolutely not be included in the text. I would also like to wish the services of the sitting the best of luck in the task they will have in putting right some paragraphs: paragraphs 59 and 69, for example. If you remove Mr Berlusconi’s name then they will be without a subject, sentences which do not make sense: there is a verb, a few adjectives but there is no subject. It would have been more responsible to delete the entire paragraph. I do not want to be cruel to you, Mr President, by asking you to read to me, out of curiosity, how paragraph 59 could end up if amended. It is not possible because there is a subject missing: who does what is written here? Who feels the consequences of what is indicated here? This is a difficult situation, Mr President; it really is a real mess.

Political group: PPE-DE
It is good that the European Union wishes to implement a code of conduct to restrict arms exports. However, I cannot accept the introduction of the requirement of a common defence policy and a European security and defence policy within NATO. Sweden is neutral and does not intend to enter into any defence alliance. Consequently, I cannot support these viewpoints, expressed either in Recital R or in Paragraphs 1 c, 1 d and 1 e.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, this simplification and modernisation has proved to be an arduous task. I should like to congratulate all those involved, particularly Parliament’s rapporteur, Mr Cornelissen and his team, the Irish Presidency and a number of previous presidencies on this achievement. My group considers this to be a sound basis, and also sets great store by the fact that it is ensured that the first step will be ready, as a matter of priority, by 1 May. Needless to say, we are not completely ready, nor are we 100% satisfied. During the new legislative period too, with 25 Member States, it will still be of the utmost importance that we should cast a critical eye on the way in which the annexes are fleshed out, as well as the development of the implementing regulation. In this respect, we should not only examine the system, for which the basis has now been laid, but also the consequences of the changes which ensue from it, because some people can be seriously let down by this. We need to seek out solutions to these problems. In addition, there are problems that cannot be solved in the regulation itself, some of which have already been mentioned, including the linking of taxes to social security systems or systems with which social security systems are complemented through collective labour agreements in private-sector industry. These are points mainly affecting frontier workers. On various occasions, we in this House have called for a frontier work test, for changes in national rules and for a much better, structured cooperation between Member States where frontier work is a frequent occurrence. Accordingly, I should like to urge the Dutch Presidency at this stage to set to work in this respect in the next half year, as soon as the review is complete. The Netherlands, along with its neighbouring countries Germany and Belgium, should set an example for the other Member States in areas in which a great deal of bilateral negotiation is yet to take place, and the Netherlands should, if possible, also produce more ambitious cooperation agreements for the 25 Member States, because it is to be expected that labour migration will intensify. Pressure of time prevents me from repeating all the points, but I should in any case like to suggest that cooperation between Parliament, Council and Commission should continue, on the same footing and in a constructive manner. This could quite possibly be in the context of a special working party, the name of which Mrs Lambert has already suggested: The Friends of 1408.

Political group: PSE