GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Can I begin by being self-critical of this Parliament. We support the Commission in drawing up a clearer and concise set of development objectives and then produce a resolution that numbers 68 separate paragraphs in response. Nevertheless, there is much in this report on which the Commission should reflect. Our objective should not be poverty reduction but poverty eradication. Integration in the world economy cannot be an end in itself in comparison with bringing the poor themselves to market. Poor people frequently depend on fragile ecosystems and therefore conservation and sustainability should be prime objectives of our policy. EU development policy should be guided by all UN international development targets and not just poverty. The EU has a key responsibility, for example, in promoting access to education for all, especially girls. However, while supporting this resolution, let us recall previous statements in the Maastricht Treaty, in Horizon 2000 and then in Agenda 2000, all of which included fine statements of goodwill on development policy. The test is implementation. Let us also recall that the Commissioner’s response in this Parliament last year that a communication on coherence had to wait until the overall development policy statement had been agreed. The protectionist backlash against the ‘Everything but Arms’ proposal demonstrates only too clearly the need to raise the profile of development objectives in our trade, agricultural and other policies. Finally, we will only manage to focus on poverty if we reallocate properly our use of resources. The Commissioner and his services have been working closely with me and Parliamentary colleagues in recent weeks to ensure agreement on how to deliver this through the budget. I thank him for that. We are very close to an understanding which will ensure that Parliament and Commission move forward together. However, a failure will seriously undermine the principles in this development policy communication and I appeal to him from the floor of the House to continue the dialogue before we reach a set of difficult votes in forthcoming weeks. I ask him to work with us so that we can turn our mutual desires into a common commitment.

Political group: PSE
The subject of this report is an extremely important one. That is why the Green/EFA Group was one of the instigators of an ITRE own-initiative report on the subject of regional integration, particularly with respect to its potential effects on multilateralism and on efforts to achieve sustainable development. However, the final title and scope of this report was much less precise than we had anticipated, and its conclusions are at significant variance from our own. Although some amendments that capture a number of our concerns were adopted, many others were not, and much of the report continues to give very uncritical support to ever greater economic integration. One of our most important amendments would make the implementation of Free Trade Areas (FTAs) conditional on a prior in-depth sustainability impact assessment, to ensure that the FTA does not exacerbate inequalities among partners, and to establish mandatory rules to promote social justice and sustainability. Since this – and amendments in a similar vein – were not adopted, we have been forced to abstain on this report.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would like to thank Mrs Attwooll for the magnificent work she has done on this report which is going to be so useful to us. Adjusting the Community fleet to the resources available is a fundamental objective of the CFP. Furthermore, it is a common sense requirement if we want our fishing to be a viable economic activity and our fishing sector to be a viable economic sector. We therefore welcome the extension of the current MAGP IV until 31 December 2002. As I have said, the Socialist Group supports Mrs Attwooll’s report, which was approved by consensus in the Committee on Fisheries, and we thank her for the compromise achieved in our committee, together with the Members presenting amendments, a compromise which the Council is still far from reaching. Parliament is sending a good signal by anticipating an agreement which the Council can accept. The Commission’s proposal is not restricted to extending the current MAGP by one year, but it also intends to introduce, as has been said, criteria relating to safety, which should be debated in the context of a new MAGP. I regret that the Commission has not made any reference to the question of safety in the White Paper on the reform of the CFP. I would like to point out that, as this House approved (on debating and approving my report on fishing accidents), Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the application of measures to promote the improvement of health and safety of workers in the workplace is also fully applicable to vessels of less than 12 metres. We ask for preventive measures, with a view to preventing accidents, both in relation to the design of vessels and life-saving equipment and to the introduction of rules of management of resources with consequences for human safety, the size and power of vessels. Lastly, I would like to point out to Commissioner Fischler that if there is one thing we were unanimous on during the hearing organised by the European Commission to present the Green Paper, it was precisely the fact that Community aid for the modernisation of the fleet should remain in force.

Political group: PSE
We wish to once again affirm our complete and unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist acts witnessed in the United States of America, and the need to provide a response based on joint action and international cooperation within the UN that fully respects its Charter. We must, however, state our strong disagreement with the method that the Commission has sought to impose in presenting its “draft regulation on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating international terrorism”. As part of the fight against terrorism, we feel it is necessary to adopt measures for combating organised crime, which specifically involve attacking money-laundering and the various forms of trafficking and abolishing tax havens. We feel it is unacceptable, however, that a list of organisations and individuals, possibly supplied by the government and intelligence services of the United States – a country which not so long ago opposed any monitoring of tax havens – should be submitted for the approval of the European Parliament, when no supporting evidence has been provided. Furthermore, it is our view that the necessary fight against terrorism must not be used as a pretext for influencing essential aspects of sovereignty of the Member States of the European Union.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, as one who has been concerned with Macedonia for eight years, I have to contradict Mr Dupuis. What we are doing here is not hypocritical. We have reached a propitious moment and I think the Macedonians are glad about it. Please stop being so unpleasant and pouring cold water on everything. I think we should take a more positive approach here. Macedonia did not go through a war. But it suffered from the war in its vicinity and from the sanctions, as it is still suffering from the sanctions that were rightly imposed on the neighbouring countries. It suffered enormously from the influx of refugees during the Kosovo war. So we must admit that developments in Macedonia have followed surprisingly continuous democratic lines. This is a country that has difficult inter-ethnic problems to deal with at home, and is resolving them with increasing success. Let me emphasise that we can congratulate Macedonia on its exemplary legislation on ethnic minorities and the way it applies it and that the consistent policy of integrating the 30% of ethnic Albanians in government activity, in government policy and in society, is a precondition for peaceful coexistence in Macedonia. I am glad to see that the hope Mr Swoboda expressed in his report will be fulfilled early in March, i.e. that we will finally have an EU delegation there and that we, as the European Union, will finally have a greater role to play there. I believe that the opening of these negotiations on the stability and association process is the logical conclusion of a salutary and positive trend in that country. As a sign of our political commitment, we must finally show Macedonia in practice that we are indeed rewarding its own welcome regional cooperation by genuinely embarking on regional projects. Let me name just two small ones: the rapid resolution of the problem of the frontier crossing with Kosovo in Blace and the creation of Corridor 8, from Albania via Macedonia to Bulgaria. I think Mr Swoboda has drafted an excellent report, and it has my wholehearted support. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, this report on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the health and safety at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding is very valid and is a step in the right direction. Point 11 in particular contains many positive proposals. At the same time, I would like to warn against a development whereby we in the European Parliament end up devoting ourselves to social policies and social legislation, something which I think is, on all accounts, the duty of the Member States. It is a very important part of the cultural and social identity which every nation and every country creates. This is one of the most important questions of all in every election campaign in Sweden and in other countries. Let this remain a national issue!

Political group: PPE-DE
I welcome Mr Brok’s report supporting with amendments the Commission’s proposals seeking to prepare Cyprus and Malta for EU membership. The package will grant around Euro 15 million in total for the two countries in the current year. It is, however, regrettable that the Commission has eschewed multiannual financing and decided instead to allocate funds on a yearly basis. This is bound to have an impact on the ability of Malta and Cyprus to plan spending. The funding will provide technical and financial support to enable the two islands to meet the requirements of the Community ‘acquis’. Given the already advanced state of these two countries, compared to other applicants, this should easily allow them to be ‘technically and administratively’ ready for membership at the end of the 5-year programme. – Cederschiöld report (A5-0020/2000)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the time allocated to us does not allow us to congratulate our rapporteurs, Mr Brok and Mr Titley, and to comment on what we are all agreed. I will have to keep a check on myself, although I should like to say that many of the cries from the heart pull on my heart strings. Although we are all agreed on peace, we sometimes question the methods and we sometimes doubt the ways in which peace is reached, and, above all, we do not want to accept the consequences. After all, we do not have a Common Foreign and Security Policy, and we need this in the first pillar with input from Parliament. I should also like to comment on Mr Titley’s excellent report concerning the arms trade. In his explanatory statement, Mr Titley identified the bottlenecks that are still troubling us at the moment. I should, above all, like to focus on the bottleneck caused by failure to implement various regulations, the first one being the Code of Conduct. Although it is in place, it is not enforceable, not at European level or in our countries. Various countries are yet to incorporate this Code of Conduct in their own legislation and add the necessary penal provisions. I should particularly like to point out that even a country such as Belgium, which incorporates this Code of Conduct in a law – and this law is being praised here – violates this law on a daily basis. Belgium supplies weapons to countries such as Nepal, while Germany, for example, had refused to do so. This is in contravention of the Code of Conduct. I should like to point out that Belgium supplies weapons to Pakistan, India, and a raft of these so-called sensitive countries. And this brings us to the point which Mr Titley flagged. The sensitive countries are the most delicate ones, but they are also the best customers ... (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, President of the Commission, your White Paper has been widely praised, but we were disappointed in it, because it has not proved the important document that we had expected after your promises. It is difficult to find any specific detail in the current reform of the Commission, in the fundamental declarations in Nice on the future of the Union or in the new IGC. We are therefore searching for the meaning. Could it perhaps be the case that differences of opinion in the board of Commissioners and pressure from some Member States have combined to reduce the scope of this White Paper? We also support greater involvement of mainstream society. That is positive. However, as Democrats, we are concerned about the sections on better policy and better legislation, and on the orientation of policy initiatives and institutions. We attach special importance to institutional equilibrium. Other speakers have already made that point, for example as regards the impact on the powers and role of the European Parliament of a greater use of “soft law” instruments. In addition, we wonder whether the new regulatory bodies we are promised and the proposed external executive bodies can be adequately monitored. We have not forgotten the whole chapter involving the BTB. Neither have you, I hope. We are positively disposed towards the proposal that the Council and the European Parliament should play an equal role in supervising the way in which the Commission fulfils its executive task. But I have other concerns. As a regionalist, I feel bound to say that the importance of the region has actually declined. There is virtually no trace here of ‘bottom-up governance’. We cannot find the ‘multi-level governance’ in which all administrative strata are involved – which was also asked for by Mr Duff. The differences of opinion in the board of Commissioners have obviously actually led to regional involvement on the final decision-making being scrapped. The Commission limits itself to a more systematic dialogue with European and national associations of regional and local authorities at an early stage in decision-making. In contrast to the draft White Paper and the report of the Commission’s preparatory working party 4 C, provision is no longer made for a differentiation in regional involvement depending on the type of Member State: unitary, decentralised, regionalised or federal. As a result, we are now going backwards compared to the present constitutional powers already enjoyed by some regions in certain Member States, for example Belgium. You can imagine that this will not excite much enthusiasm in our regions for the governance outlined here.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I should like first of all to say thank you to Mr Cashman and Mr Mann for the two reports. It is incredibly important that we should now secure implementation of the package which is the first and interim realisation of Article 13 of the EC Treaty. In that way, we should be taking an important step towards removing discrimination against minorities in the EU and the applicant countries. I should therefore like to emphasise two important points. First of all, I believe that, if the initiatives for combating discrimination that we are now putting in place are to succeed in practice and on a day-to-day basis, it is crucial that the NGOs which represent the minorities affected should be involved as much as possible in the work. Otherwise, the initiatives will not succeed in the real world. The second thing I want to point out is that, with this first package, the Commission has unfortunately committed a serious error by itself putting reasons for discrimination in order of priority. Only racial discrimination is to be prohibited in all areas of society in general. Discrimination for other reasons, for example because of handicap or sexual orientation, is only prohibited when it comes to employment and occupation. Grounds for discrimination should have equal status. Discrimination is equally offensive, whether it occurs on the basis of race or sexual orientation. I therefore wish strongly to support Mrs Swiebel’s proposal to the effect that the Commission be obliged to correct this error within the next three years. I can see that the Commissioner is here today. Today is therefore a good opportunity to confirm that this proposal will be followed up.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as Commissioner Barnier said, it is important that the Union confirms its solidarity with the countries whose forestry resources and agricultural productions have been affected. In view of this, it would be a very serious mistake to reduce the environmental disaster of this summer to the economic losses it involved. It is, first and foremost, a huge humanitarian disaster, equivalent for the whole of Europe to 10 times the scale of the attacks of 11 September. In effect, it is the first major disaster which is both economic and humanitarian caused by the climate shift in the temperate zone. This climate shift has coincided with another equally disastrous trend: the increasing isolation of a section of the population which is also increasingly dependent because it is elderly. I will leave my colleagues from the Group of the the task of expounding on the absolute priorities resulting from this shameful experience, from this condemnation of our development model: the need to speed up Kyoto, the rejection of an endeavour to boost the economy based on a motorway programme, the discrediting of the nuclear sector as an alternative for fossil energies, the obligation to adapt our flora and our habitat to the changes which have already occurred. However, it is just as important to adapt our health system and our social security networks to protect our elderly people against climate shocks. The loosening of family ties, including the links of geographic proximity, due to the individualisation of our societies and growing mobility, is a largely irreversible phenomenon which is not wholly negative. Our elderly people, we, ourselves, in the future, will be able to cope with the situation provided that services of general interest are developed to offset it, both in the public sector and in the third sector, the associative and cooperative sector. Is the fact that France has been particularly affected not due first and foremost to the fact that, for two years, grants to the associations managing old people’s homes have been halved, in the same way as care allowance has been cut? That is why we are calling upon the Commission to draw up a Green Paper on the protection of elderly people and combating climate and, more generally, health risks, on the basis of European best practice.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, as you know I am a very enthusiastic anti-smoker. However, I would just like to remind colleagues that they can smoke in comfort and away from everybody else in the designated area over there to the right at the window.

Political group: PPE-DE
draftsman of the opinion for the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. – Mr President, I too, on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, fervently congratulate Mrs Sanders-ten Holte on her report, which has certainly adopted the spirit of the amendments we brought in. Those amendments were directed to the improvement of Regulation 2027/97 and to the consumer rights which should be asserted. I therefore particularly want to speak in support of Amendments Nos 1, 4, 8, 13 and 18, which have that effect. The previous speaker, from my own country – we at least carry the same passport, though we have different views – referred to the situation in the UK. It is true that IATA brought the UK government to court in terms of the possible extension of powers beyond what the legal position allows. Judge Jowitt ruled that conflict did indeed exist between the Regulation and the Warsaw Convention. But I would point out to my British colleague that he agreed with the UK government that Article 234 of the Treaty did in fact render this conflict invalid. The Regulation was therefore held to be valid. IATA lost their challenge and no other referral has been made to the European Court of Justice on this matter. I therefore regard this as a legal red herring and I would prefer to concentrate on the merits of Mrs Sanders-ten Holte's proposals because they will give the consumer travelling by air rights which have been lost for a long time. The Warsaw Convention is 70 years of age. If you now find yourself stuck in an airport, with your baggage gone, your flight delayed, or perhaps cannibalised, you get this little piece of paper which tells you what your rights are under the Warsaw Convention. Those rights are negligible. What we are doing here is extending a body of practice which will allow us to protect consumers. That is what we should be doing tonight.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Stevenson, the European Commission rejected the proposal by the Spanish Presidency of the Council to adopt actions to promote protein crops of which there is a shortfall in the European Union, and which are being replaced with soya imports, mainly from the United States and often genetically modified. The Commission argues that amending the current policy could lead to legal proceedings being instituted against us in the WTO, something that should not concern us, given the protectionist attitude of the Bush administration. Commissioner, there is no doubt that our animal-feed industry and, ultimately, our livestock production and our food depend, to a large extent, on just one product: soya, the production and trading of which are under the control of the United States. How can the European Union allow this enormous strategic dependence to continue? Maintaining or increasing imports of these products which are not surplus to requirements, such as non-genetically modified soya and corn from developing countries, must be an important part of our cooperation policy but, at the same time, it must also be a priority to promote self-sufficient and sustainable agri-breeding systems within the least-favoured regions of the European Union, which create employment and sustain the rural population, primary genetic resources and the necessary production of biofuels.

Political group: Verts-ALE
The Danish Social Democrats have voted against a report designed to introduce aid for pigmeat producers in the EU. The Commission has proposed introducing an aid scheme for pigmeat producers by establishing equalisation funds in the Member States. The proposal is unnecessary and harmful because it introduces a new form of aid for a sector which has so far acquitted itself well without aid. The crisis in the pig sector has resolved itself through the market economy, and precisely because unnecessary and expensive aid schemes have not been introduced. Parliament’s report will introduce still more aid schemes. Producers are to receive 100% aid from the fund to reduce their production, and the EU is to co-finance the scheme. We are therefore voting against both the Commission’s proposal and Parliament’s report.

Political group: PSE