GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Commissioner, the tragedy caused by the drastic streamlining measures at Ford Genk has exposed a number of painful areas in the European car industry. There is the slump in sales, 5% since 1999 to be precise, the environmental burden against which Europe may have taken various, but insufficient, measures, as well as the powerlessness of the Member States to have any impact whatsoever on international company strategies. This is why I urgently call for a European initiative to support the further development of the industry within the context of a policy, instead of waiting passively for yet another reorganisation. This European initiative should consist of a number of elements; first of all, the further development of a concept for a sustainable car. Whoever is the first to introduce this onto the market and is most advanced in this respect will achieve the highest sales figures. If China and India switch over to generalised car traffic, the environmental burden will become untenable. Secondly, new technological developments need support and staff. Europe must take on the competition with quality and added value as its main assets, rather than cost control. For the latter is beyond our powers! For this to happen, it will have to anticipate the ever-growing component of electronics in the added value of a car. Thirdly, large-scale reorganisations have a social dimension. By 2006, the next programme of structural funds must be approved. I hope that the Commission, during the revision of the European structural funds, particularly in the light of Limburg, will inject more resources into providing support during far-reaching industrial transformations. Following that, there is something to which you have already alluded, namely the issue of the Renault Directive. It must be evaluated as an absolute measure. People on the ground tell me that the procedure established would lead to the mechanical application of the directive. Employers are so frightened of making a procedural mistake that consultation is actually prevented from the word go. We should therefore evaluate this directive as an absolute priority. These are only a few initiatives; there are still many more around which Europe could work. Finally, it is not all doom and gloom in Belgium's car industry: Volvo, Opel and Volkswagen are continuing to invest and Ford has decided to further develop the new Mondeo in Genk. In principle, we should not fear the relocation of the European, and hence the Belgian, car industry. After all, the products involved are highly technological with an ever increasing knowledge component, the end production of which will take place ever more closely to the market. Commissioner, I truly hope that it will be possible to develop a policy for industries for the future.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I only wished to say that I sent a letter to Mr Cox last week to inform him about a disaster which struck the island of Tenerife, specifically the capital, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where unfortunately, as well as the material damage, seven people lost their lives. I would be grateful if you could pass on our condolences to the Mayor of the city and I would also be grateful if on Thursday this House could support the motion for a resolution that some Canarian Members have tabled.

Political group: ELDR
I welcome a new action plan for the Northern Dimension which will embrace three new Baltic states and Poland as EU members in 2004, Russia, with which I support a privileged status in a common economic space one day, and the EEA states of Iceland and Norway. I am concerned about the environmental hazards in the far north and I strongly urge the Russians to sign the MNEPR Agreement, as they have agreed to do, on joint action for decommissioning of their spent nuclear fuel rods and warheads rotting in their naval submarines which might contaminate the Murmansk area. Negotiations on the accession of ten countries to the EEA were launched in Brussels just last week. Enlargement of the EU entails simultaneous enlargement of the EEA in order to safeguard the homogeneity of the internal market. There is no justification for the idea that the contributions of the EEA countries should be comparable to those of EU Member States and the Commission's demand for a 22-fold increase for Norway is absurd. Third countries do not enjoy the same rights and privileges as Member States; in some cases there is reduced market access due to tariff imposition. An example is Norway's loss of free trade in fish with Poland. The EEA Agreement is a good agreement but it has its limitations. Recent opinion polls in Norway indicate that public perceptions of the Union are changing; that support for membership is growing and will inevitably dominate the political agenda at the next elections. I would like also to raise the issue of Belarus, which has borders with four of the Member States that are party to the action plan and, given its union with Russia, might one day become part of the group. It is important for the EU to maintain its dual-track approach and pressure for democratic reforms there. But notwithstanding our political differences with that country, we are still committed in areas of mutual interest such as the management of illegal immigration and cross-border crime.

Political group: PPE-DE
I am vehemently in favour of keeping, indeed developing, cultural diversity in Europe, particularly at this time when it is being enlarged to comprise twenty-five Member States. Since languages are the main component of this diversity, then I am in favour of linguistic enlargement, in spite of any material or technical difficulties that may arise from it. Incidentally, I fear that there is a double game being played by those who are arguing for an increase in the number of languages, with the actual aim of better establishing the monopoly of English. Therefore, we need to work on the language question, in particular by again giving objective consideration to Esperanto. The monopoly of English is neither good for Europe nor for Great Britain, whose language will become a mere ‘nuts and bolts language’

Political group: GUE-NGL
I voted in favour of Mrs Müller's report and I should like to highlight the quality of the work done by our rapporteur. I am delighted that this House is finally speaking out on such an important issue. Today it is a question of ensuring that the products concerned do not present a health risk by guaranteeing that the labels provide European consumers with clear, accurate and appropriate information about the products. It is desirable to set a minimum level of vitamins and minerals which these products have to contain so as to guarantee that the food supplements contain them in sufficient quantity to justify the stated objective of the product. Once we have agreed the principles in accordance with which the maximum and minimum quantities are to be set, the adoption of specific limits for each nutrient, on the basis of the opinion issued by the Scientific Committee for Food, is a purely technical matter. Let us not forget that absorbing excessive quantities of some vitamins and minerals can have undesirable or harmful effects. That is why it is necessary to guarantee the safety of these products, amongst other things by having labels with precise instructions on the use of the product and in particular the quantity that may be consumed. The European public will thus be able to have peace of mind when choosing vitamins and mineral supplements from the huge range of products currently available on the market, without having to worry constantly about damaging their health.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office, you have rightly placed emphasis on meeting the expectations of our peoples. I can tell you that the people of Essex and other parts of the east of England that I represent would like less interference in their lives by the European Union. They want to run their own affairs. Our businesses want to sharpen their ability to compete in global markets, not to be weighed down by unnecessary red tape and regulation, much of which originates in Brussels and is then gold plated by our own Labour Government. In particular they want a fair crack of the whip. The one aspect of the European Union for which there is any enthusiasm is the single market, but British farmers and businessmen have always suspected that the odds were deliberately stacked against them because certain Member States simply ignored the rules. Now the Commission has confirmed that suspicion with its announcement on Monday that France, Belgium and Germany, those great EU enthusiasts, are bottom of the league for implementing internal market rules, and France tops the list of infringement cases. I think immediately of the long-running and illegal ban on British beef. You said you wanted to focus on the Lisbon Agenda. To give yourself a bit of breathing space, I suggest that the first thing you should do is kick the proposed Constitution firmly into touch. The notion that the Constitution was essential for an enlarged Union is clearly a myth. It was just a vehicle for further political integration and that is something that our citizens simply do not want. Similarly, they do not want European Union involvement in military matters, complicating and duplicating Nato and creating additional tensions with our vital transatlantic allies. The reality is that defence budgets are being slashed across continental Europe and even the superb British armed forces are desperately overstretched and under-equipped. European Union politicians playing bureaucratic games in Brussels will not help this situation. Finally, Mr President-in-Office, you rightly emphasise your intention to focus on practical human rights issues. One of the first decisions you will need to push through Council is the renewal of targeted sanctions against the ZANU-PF regime in Zimbabwe. I would ask you to respond to Parliament's demands on this matter.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, until recently I was an observer in this House. Today I am a fully-fledged Member of the European Parliament. I have noticed that words like solidarity, assistance, and cooperation are often bandied about in the Chamber. These words do have real meaning. It sometimes happens, however, that a wonderful idea loses out against ruthless interests. Work on reform of the common agricultural policy is an example of this. The Fifteen old Member States used Article 23 of the Treaty of Accession concluded between Poland and the European Union to further their own interests. The conditions applicable to Polish agriculture established in Copenhagen in December 2002 were changed to our disadvantage. Poland is a country of great opportunities. With some support, it could develop impressively and benefit the whole European Union. In over a thousand years of its history, my nation has demonstrated that it is not afraid of difficult challenges. It has shown itself capable of great deeds for the common good. It is no exaggeration to state that a Poland with a vibrant economy and enriched by the spirit of its citizens will be an asset to the European Union. I am convinced we shall not be a burden on Europe. We shall prove a tower of strength for it. Poland has never let Europe down, and it never will. I trust Europe will not let Poland down either.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, the rapporteur, Mr Imbeni, has done an excellent job. There is no need to repeat anything. I should like to expand on two problematic issues. The first is a question of principle. Humanitarian aid has to be provided regardless of what has caused the catastrophes concerned and irrespective of any other political objectives. Its increasing politicisation in recent years is an unacceptable and, ultimately, also inhumane phenomenon. But at the same time, it should also be noted that the growing number of catastrophes is not only due to natural events over which we have no control. As it is, this cannot be said of wars, in which humanitarian aid has to be supplied, perhaps by ECHO. An increasing number of natural disasters are clearly linked to the fact that we are placing ever greater demands on the global ecosphere and biosphere. The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, has reported, for example, that we can already see a, 'discernible human influence on global climate'. Our concepts of crisis management ought therefore, in my opinion, also to have a socio-political dimension and be integrated into development policy and, for example, economic policy strategy. Otherwise we will, in many cases, only be repairing the damage inflicted as a consequence of our own policy, and the people in the countries of the South, in particular, will suffer as a result of the disasters which we have caused. The second problem is directly linked to the first and yet is of a very practical nature. I call on the Commission – even if the extensive problem which I have just outlined is not yet resolved – to link the design, organisation and operation of humanitarian aid more closely to development policy. The Commission has already made attempts to do this, which I feel still need to be stepped up considerably and freed of red tape. An example of this is, in my opinion, the concept of emergency relief which is geared to development, which the Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (Company for Technical Cooperation) is trying to put into practice.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, Commissioner Nielson, ladies and gentlemen, West Africa is in the process of structuring its cooperation in the form of a common market. It is creating common regional, economic and political structures. If everything goes according to plan, we shall be able to talk and hold discussions with parliamentarians from the new West African regional assembly of the regional parliament at next year's ACP assembly. We shall be able to organise our practical cooperation. But there are a few serious constraints, one of the most serious being the authoritarian regime of President Eyadéma in Togo. We are calling for the immediate release and restoration of the democratic rights of Yawowi Agboyibo, who was arbitrarily arrested and is now serving a six-month sentence which he has done nothing to deserve. Having served over five months of his sentence, the president should release him without further ado. We are not calling for a pardon. He did nothing wrong, he merely highlighted abuse in the system and he should be released from prison as quickly as possible. We are devastated that the attempt by our President, Nicole Fontaine, to meet President Eyadéma in Paris last week and ask him, as a favour, to arrange for this release, proved fruitless. Eyadéma is playing cat and mouse with us. We can no longer allow provision to be made for more development aid here. We support the Commission in suspending development aid. But we hope that we shall soon be able to provide further humanitarian aid for the people of Togo and we also hope that democratisation will continue next year, despite all the obstacles, and that it will be possible to hold parliamentary elections and then presidential elections a year later. We call on Eyadéma to put an end to this farce once and for all. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission President began his statement this morning by saying that the Union is in a good state of health. What planet is he on? The Stability Pact, one of the foundations of our single currency, is in jeopardy, and the single currency is one of the pillars of this entire Union. With his extremely ill-considered description of the Pact as the ‘Stupidity Pact’, the Commission President has himself contributed to its derailment. Two major countries have blatantly departed from compliance with the Stability Pact’s rules. Regrettably, this includes my own country, which pushed for the launch of the Pact in the first place. How, and with what authority, does the Commission President intend to call these countries to order given that he himself has helped to undermine the Pact? What is the Commission President actually doing to counter the threat to the Pact which also emanates from the Convention’s draft? Who actually authorised the Convention to delete the goal of price stability from the catalogue of Union objectives? Price stability is the basis of the Union’s entire monetary constitution. In Germany, we lobbied for our public’s endorsement of the single currency and the phasing out of the Deutschmark by assuring them that price stability and the independence of the Central Bank would be guaranteed. We will feel cheated if the goal of price stability is now softened and price stability is put on the backburner. That is why, Mr Prodi, we expect you to give Commissioner Solbes your backing on this matter, not stab him in the back. As a second point, you mentioned the Lisbon strategy. In ten years’ time, we will supposedly be the most dynamic and competitive economic area in the world. Is this anything more than empty words? Believe me, Mr President, you will need to change your legislative culture in more ways than one if we are to achieve this objective! (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, on the eve of the vote at first reading of the 2003 budget, I must confess to mixed feelings. We are working to overcome the constraints of the Community budget as best we can and find the best possible arbitration. Having said that, I cannot prevent myself from thinking that we placed these constraints on ourselves. The now regular reduction in the Community budget as a percentage of GDP seems to me to be of particular concern. Once again, we do not appear to want to equip ourselves with the means to fulfil our ambitions. The situation of heading 4 is a prime example of this. The Council, in the context of large multinational conferences, undertakes to support various very worthy causes: the reconstruction of Afghanistan, campaigns to fight AIDS, etc. Then, when it returns to Brussels, it does not seem to want to give us the means to keep its promises. We owe it to ourselves to remind the Member States of their duty to ensure coherence and, in particular, to fulfil our ambitions with regard to enlargement. More generally, I believe that the current Financial Perspective system has shown that it is no longer capable of fulfilling the needs of Europe. I would not like you to think, however, that our draft budget is bad. On the contrary, I believe that, in many areas, we have succeeded in making progress and finding compromises that are acceptable to everyone. I welcome the fact that, as regards heading 1, the amendments proposed by the Committee on Budgets clearly reflect our wish to make the common agricultural policy fairer, more just and more sustainable, and to strengthen its rural development pillar. The budget must first and foremost fulfil the citizens’ expectations. The amendments proposed by my group with regard to the ‘information and communication policy’ chapters are along these lines and are essential to the future of Europe. The same is true of support for small businesses and craft trades. As Mrs Haug stated in our various speeches, that must be a priority. Employment depends on it. These appropriations cannot be refused year upon year. I would nonetheless like to thank our two rapporteurs for having instigated new methods of budgetary debate, for greater transparency, because all this is indispensable with a view to increasing citizens’ awareness of European politics in future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I support Mr De Rossa in relation to the nuclear shipments. It is quite outrageous that, despite huge public opposition, these kind of shipments are taking place. Coming so close to September 11, people should be especially aware of the dangers of shipping materials like these. The interests of the public should be served instead of the interests of the nuclear industry. I also support Mr De Rossa in saying that you, Mr President, should do something about this. Coming from a country like Ireland which is so strongly against these shipments and also against the whole concept of the nuclear industry, I think something should be done to send a message from this Parliament that we are extremely concerned about the shipments. I would also like to support my colleague Mrs Ahern in relation to the stoning to death. We need to encourage some countries in the European Union that have repatriation agreements with countries like Nigeria to review the whole idea that it is safe to send asylum seekers and refugees back to these countries. I am speaking here about my own country which thinks nothing of sending refugees and asylum seekers back to Nigeria, knowing that this is the kind of situation they face.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, although we welcome the Commission communication, I regret that it does not adequately reflect the fundamental principle – stated in Cotonou – of participation by non-state actors (NSAs). Support from the Commission for non-state actors must be ensured, especially in countries where such support is not provided by government agencies. In doing this, those NSA projects that already have a successful track record should, in the interests of continuity, remain under NSA management, thus averting any risk that EU funding will trickle away into government structures. It has long been undisputed in the EU that civil society is an important pillar of its social development. The contributions made by civil society during the European Convention’s negotiations on an EU constitution are a recent example of this. Yet the increasingly robust civil society in the ACP states had no chance of participating in the negotiations on the current Cotonou Agreement. This, in my view, is where the Commission wasted an opportunity. The German Development Minister condescended to hold a joint press conference with a number of NGOs at the time, but she failed to give adequate support to civil society’s direct participation in the negotiations. Of course, there are still some developing countries that deal with aid funds in a fairly arbitrary way. That is the flip-side of the developing countries’ greater individual responsibility for the formulation of development policy, which is what we are seeking to achieve. Nonetheless, part of the balance can undoubtedly be restored by a strong civil society in the countries concerned. It is hardly surprising that most governments in the ACP countries reject such demands. For many ACP governments, non-state actors are still synonymous with opposition. It is even more important, therefore, for the Commission to take this step in the right direction at last.

Political group: PPE-DE