GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I have spoken several times previously on this complex subject involving quite considerable economic interests, but also, and above all, the protection of the environment. The proposal for a directive on end-of-life vehicles, submitted in 1997, is aimed at preventing the creation of scrap from vehicles and promoting the re-use, recycling and recovery of vehicles and their components, so as to reduce the amount of scrap produced by end-of-life vehicles that are dumped or incinerated without any energy recovery. The European Commission’s strategy is based on measures such as increasing the percentage of re-usable components, ensuring an adequate number of collection points for end-of-life vehicles, achieving a number of objectives regarding the re-use and recovery of end-of-life vehicles, checks on the use of certain heavy metals in vehicle manufacture and ensuring that the cost of disposing of end-of-life vehicles is not borne by the last owner. The negotiations came up against stumbling blocks on several points. The difficulties focused on producer liability and the treatment of heavy metals. After several hours of conciliation, the negotiators managed to reach agreement. On the question of producer liability, the directive stipulated that the last owner would be able to return an end-of-life vehicle free of charge and required producers to bear a substantial part of the cost of treating end-of-life vehicles. The compromise provides that for new vehicles, i.e. for those put on the market after 1 July 2002, producers should be liable from that date. For existing vehicles, i.e. vehicles put on the market before 1 July 2002, producer liability would begin in 2007 rather than 2006. The directive would also allow Member States to introduce these provisions before the dates specified. On the question of heavy metals, the Council and Parliament have agreed that vehicles put on the market after 1 July 2003 should no longer contain heavy metals such as cadmium, lead or hexavalent chromium. The two delegations reached agreement on the exceptions set out in Annex 2 of the directive. Apart from that, I am glad that Parliament’s call for vintage cars to be excluded from the scope of the directive was favourably received.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we all know, to borrow a phrase from Mr Brok’s report, that accession will mean a major shock to economic, social, political and cultural development in the countries in question and just how deeply that shock will reverberate. I would gladly discuss the specifics of the Council’s enlargement policy but that would presuppose that there is an openly and clearly-defined policy and if reference was made today to the huge significance of Gorbachev’s glasnost for subsequent German reunification, then we too should demand that glasnost be practised in the Council and in connection with enlargement eastwards. I am not surprised, under present circumstances, that enlargement has hardly penetrated the consciousness of our citizens or that it is increasingly accompanied by worry and suspicion, whereas today’s debate and all thirteen reports demonstrate the common commitment of large sections of the European Parliament to enlargement to the east and to enlargement configured in a responsible, forward-looking manner. As far as I am concerned, three criteria are more important in relation to all the problems than the not insignificant criticism which I have on individual points. First, the democratic wish of the countries and people in question must be respected after their accession to the EU. It exists so far, but will possibly be jeopardised by a bureaucratic lack of transparency and the obvious, but not public resistance of certain governments. It is therefore urgent and imperative not to allow institutional reform of the EU or enlargement to be postponed. I also call for individual countries to be given possible target dates. Secondly, I am one of those who are disquieted by current neo-liberal trends in the EU. The various reports reflect this mainstream attitude. Nonetheless, the truly historic opportunity of enlargement must be defended for the sake of stability and security and the chance to develop cultural diversity and configure a new large economic area in Europe. Thirdly, acceptance of enlargement and its positive prospects for the individual countries and for the EU as a whole basically depend – and Denmark demonstrated this – on dismantling the social and democratic deficits of European policy. We cannot therefore just make demands on the candidate countries. Enlargement is basically a challenge for the EU itself to reform and an opportunity to steer the social, employment policy and democratic aspects of European integration as a whole. Provided that the reports, especially Mr Brok’s overall report are not spoilt on these points during tomorrow’s vote, I shall vote in favour of them all. (Applause)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Madam President, I would like to thank you for mentioning at the start of the sitting the tragedy which took place at Milan Linate airport, which claimed 118 lives. Investigations are currently being carried out into who is responsible. Of course, it became clear very early on that, while, regrettably, human error is always possible, it was made possible in this case largely by the severe lack of security in that airport, which we all believed to be safe. From the human point of view, I feel that it is becoming imperative that these errors are not repeated and that such a tragic incident should compel all those responsible to undertake solemnly to ensure that such tragedies are avoided in the future. As regards responsibility, I feel that we, as the European Union, should call upon the Commission and the Council to be more rigorous in enforcing the imperative need for airport security, to ensure that such tragedies are avoided in future.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, when we were discussing the compromise version of this text, all of the groups felt that the step change in the Northern dimension that will take place on enlargement will entail alterations to regional policy. Therefore we would like to insert an overarching paragraph at the beginning of point 3, which reads as follows: 'adapting the general approach to the changing situation where partner countries become Members in the EU, noting the specific needs this creates for regional development and cross–border cooperation.'

Political group: ELDR
He knew what those jubilant crowds did not know but could have learned from books: that the plague bacillus never dies or disappears for good; that it can lie dormant for years and years in furniture and linen-chests; that it bides its time in bedrooms, cellars, trunks, and bookshelves; and that perhaps the day would come when, for the bane and the enlightening of men, it would rouse up its rats again and send them forth to die in a happy city.” It is with these phrases that Albert Camus, at the close of the long allegorical novel describing the difficult fight of the citizens of the town of Oran against the plague, reminds us, at the close of the Second World War, that the fight against Nazism, “the brown plague” as it was termed at the time, could not enjoy a definitive victory. That because racial hatred, xenophobic violence, fear and rejection of what is different, have deep roots in all that is basest in humanity, they may re-emerge at any moment and take over any group of human beings. In this light, the events we are seeing in Austria must be seen as tragic. For the first time since the Second World War, a party which is openly pro-Nazi, racist and xenophobic has gained access to power in a European country. Confronted with this threat, which carries with it the negation of the very idea which lies at the heart of the construction of Europe, nothing must deter us: not the legal quibbling about what the treaty does or does not permit, not the legitimate questions about the right to intervene, not the derisory respect for formal democracy, and, above all, not the feeling of powerlessness which grips us in the face of an event which we reject with all the force of our convictions but which we are powerless to control. As the representative for a French overseas department, the island of Réunion, a land of racial and ethnic intermixing, where the population has been forged in the course of the last three centuries by the successive contributions of Europeans, blacks from Africa or Madagascar, enlisted men from India or Pakistan, or even Chinese, every day I experience the profound truth of the remark by Saint-Exupéry, “In being different to me, you are not doing me harm, brother, but enriching me!” This human diversity is our main sources of wealth, and this is the reason why it is my duty to track down and to condemn anything which may be harmful to it, wherever it may exist. For all these reasons I voted most decidedly in favour of the resolution before this House on the formation of the government in Austria.

Political group: PSE
I have voted against the proposal. Sweden’s do not support items 5 and 11, which propose that the European Union should be given its own powers of taxation. We do not want to increase the number of tax levels in society for our citizens. Swedish tax payers pay tax to the municipality, the county council and the state. Creating another level of taxation, a European one, means an inevitable increase in taxation in the long term. This is a development which we do not want to support. If the EU receives what the report calls ‘financial autonomy’, this will also lead to political autonomy from Member States and their governments, with all the dangers and the lack of control which this brings with it. We do not wish to support such a development. - Costa Neves report (A5-0241/2001)

Political group: PPE-DE
Ladies and gentlemen, as agreed with my group, I am withdrawing my candidacy. My group has discussed at length the various qualities of the candidates. I believe that, whatever the outcome, we will have a worthy President. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, there is much to support in and little to add to the excellent report by Mr Camisón Asensio. I merely wish to highlight the inexcusable fact that the Committee on Petitions is still being rudely ignored by the Council of Ministers, none of whom – not so much as a representative – has ever wanted to work with us. Why would they? European citizens generally take recourse to the Committee on Petitions precisely in order to complain about infringements or omissions by ministers and their services, when they are wronged or when their protest or complaint is ignored. That is precisely why the Committee on Petitions and the European Ombudsman have become the refuge of those who believe that they have been wronged or who, as civic-minded citizens, are trying to do something about infringements, injustice or the destruction of the environment. That is why the European Parliament needs to pay greater attention to the Committee on Petitions and to give it more scope for efficient intervention. It is true that the Committee works closely with us but it often comes up against the indifference and filibustering of national services. As a result, cases drag on interminably, to the disappointment of the European citizens seeking our support. That is why the Camisón Asensio report quite rightly says that short, mandatory deadlines need to be introduced for dealing with petitions more quickly. At the same time, we need a procedure for publicising complaints and the inertia or filibustering of the authorities against which the complaint has been made in the petitioner's country. This will give citizens the only weapon which the guilty authorities fear: publicity which exposes them to the voters. A proposal which, if adopted, would I think be hugely important: we need, subject to certain requirements, to introduce an injunctions procedure so that an immediate stop can be put to any incipient infringements of Community law which threaten to wreak irreparable damage on the natural environment or our cultural heritage. Because the time-consuming procedure up to final judgment by the European Court is bereft of any material value if the damage has already been done and cannot be reversed.

Political group: PPE-DE
I welcome the adoption of this Sixth Environment Action Programme as I believe that it will greatly strengthen EU environmental laws across a range of key sectors – water, air, and noise pollution, waste management, levels of pesticides and dangerous chemicals, and the reduction of greenhouse gases. As far as Ireland is concerned, I must caution that the Irish government's laissez-faire attitude to environmental protection over the past five years means that Ireland will have great difficulty in achieving the EU’s new environmental objectives as adopted by the European Parliament today. The Irish Government has one of the worst records in Europe when it comes to complying with existing objectives, thus making it more difficult for Ireland to achieve the new targets set for the next decade. The Government’s policy of effectively ignoring EU environmental laws, to which it has signed up, means that Ireland will have great difficulty in achieving the EU’s new, stricter environmental objectives. Failing to comply with EU environmental laws is not only a matter of breaking agreements Ireland has freely entered into with our European partners, it also is a denial of the right of Irish people to the clean and safe environment they are entitled to as EU citizens. - Recommendation for second reading by Mr Hatzidakis (A5-0437/2001)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I should like to say that I am very unhappy with the Commission’s reply. A number of questions were raised, yet we have not even heard the Commission call for those detained to be released. This is what most if not all the political groups in the House would wish. I would remind the Commissioner that politically, the Commission is not answerable to the Council. It is in fact answerable to this House. (Applause)

Political group: PPE-DE
I have a follow-up question also concerning the Schengen Agreement and exemption from the requirement to carry a passport. As the Commissioner surely knows, the Nordic countries are to become signatories of the Schengen Agreement in March of next year. It has emerged that, in future too, Swedish citizens who are to travel within the Schengen area will have to carry their Swedish passports with them because Swedish ID documents do not state the country of which they are citizens, as required under the Schengen Agreement. What was promised as a union with exemption from the requirement to carry passports still makes the latter compulsory for Swedish citizens. I wonder if the Commissioner can confirm that, once Sweden has entered into the Schengen Agreement, the latter’s regulations will, in the future too, require Swedes to have their passports with them when they travel to other countries within the Schengen area. What are your views on this?

Political group: GUE-NGL
What does the practice of education in the developing countries teach us? Above all, that good primary education is still far from being granted the priority status that it deserves. Good, free education is essential for development. Nine hundred million people are still illiterate. The Dakar objectives are in danger of not being achieved by a long chalk. For this reason, new impetus is necessary at the highest political level, particularly from Europe, America and Japan. There is an urgent need for a strategically developed initiative with a realistic timescale and more financial resources. Indicative programmes must be drawn up for each country. Up to now, the European Union has paid far too little attention to education. The argument that other donors are already doing sufficient is simply and demonstrably untrue. The cause for the shortfall in educational facilities lies not only with the donors. Many developing countries themselves give it far too low a priority. It is outrageous that in Africa twice as much money should be spent on military equipment as on education. If India continues to spend less than 1% of its GDP on school facilities, of course, development will never come off the ground. The report of Mrs Kinnock is excellent. Certainly, special attention will have to be paid to girls, early school-leavers, and also former child soldiers. The basic rights of children will only be respected if adults draw the right political lessons from failing educational practice.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, firstly, I would very much like to congratulate Mrs Ayuso on the excellent work she has done. As you know, the aim of this directive in terms of taxes is to establish a Community framework which allows Member States to apply a differentiated tax system which favours biofuels. In terms of the content of its directive, the European Commission is proposing a series of measures which, on the whole, are balanced and well-structured. However, I believe that we should allow each Member State the greatest possible freedom to set the level of reduction of special taxes, that is, to promote this type of fuel and not to establish a minimum level of tax. I believe that each country of the European Union is going to try over the next few years to achieve the reduction in CO2 emissions we have set for 2020 within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol and, according to their circumstances, some will put more emphasis on the use of biofuels and others on wind power, etc. For this reason, I believe it is essential to make this directive more flexible. Furthermore, it goes without saying that each Member State is sovereign when it comes to deciding the extent to which in their particular case it pays to lose income via special taxes if that leads to a reduction in CO2 emissions. In the same way, I fear that this will be the only way to move this proposal forward within the Council, where, as you know, there is a great divide on this issue. With regard to the policy on interinstitutional information and transparency, in general, I am very much in favour – particularly on issues relating to the environment, with regard to which there is great sensitivity, which seems doubly important – of our all being informed punctually of the development of the various programmes.

Political group: PPE-DE
The Finnish delegation of the Group voted in favour of Mr van Velzen’s report and supports him with regard to its content, although it contains one point that we cannot accept, and that concerns the distribution of the UMTS spectrum via auction, which should not be regulated at Community level, as he proposes. Arguments can be presented in favour of both spectrum auctions and so-called beauty contests. The fact is that the astronomical prices that result from spectrum auctions always end up with consumers having to foot the bill. Beauty contests are, in many respects, more consumer-oriented and more of an alternative that supports the freeing up of the market. On all the other points Mr van Velzen has our full support.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, Council representative, ladies and gentlemen, I fully agree with everything Mr Salafranca has said on Eurostat and, in this opinion, I would point out the rightful need for a transparent response, which has been fully met by what the Commission has done and by the action plan presented today. It is worrying that we should continue to exploit this matter for political ends, blowing out of all proportion a question which is certainly not central to the life of the Union, while the Iraq tragedy strikes once again, reminding us of our inability to act and, what is more, our hypocrisy in the face of a war which was started to combat terrorism but which has ultimately served only to fuel it. We are not involved. We do not have our finger on the world’s pulse. Our times demand a great injection of political measures, giving Europe a soul and making it more than a wounded, helpless giant that some people continue today to want to see caught in the vice of bureaucratic neutrality: we need more politics of the kind proposed in Mr Prodi’s document, which he has addressed as a European citizen to his own country, first and foremost, but which applies to the Union as a whole and to all its political groupings, including the members of the Group of the European People’s Party , Mr Poettering, the many whom you should be representing as well, who cannot sit back and accept any shift to the right.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, it is a privilege to have the opportunity of taking part in this debate. As one of the majority at the conciliation group in Luxembourg on 5 June, my primary motive in voting was to ensure that Parliament would have the chance to vote on this third reading. It would have been a scandal if, at 1 a.m. in Luxembourg on 5 June, 15 of us had voted it down and prevented Parliament having this debate. We can assure all those visiting this House today that there will not be a more important decision affecting the well-being of industry in Europe than this one. My group will have a free vote on it and I believe others will as well. We will, as individual Members of Parliament, stand by our consciences on this issue at tomorrow's vital vote. Sometimes I feel I am living in a looking glass land when I hear that all sorts of disastrous takeovers will occur if the directive is carried. Members must remember that takeovers will go on in all events. The issue is whether we have a common set of norms in Europe which govern us all. Will we have a single basic law for takeovers or will we let the chaos continue? Mr Lehne makes a powerful point about the damage that can be done by golden shares, about the unfairness of the absence of a level playing field. We will not move closer to a level playing field by throwing out this directive. That will make it impossible over the next decade to get anywhere near a level playing field. We must, therefore, move forward on this occasion. It would be shocking not to do so. It will probably take four years, if we carry this tomorrow, before it comes into effect. Trade unionists and employees of companies throughout Europe will still have to wait four years to get what Mr Medina Ortega already regards as not enough. But they have far less at the moment. If the directive goes through, the board of a bidding or offeree company will have to declare its hand at the time of the bid. It will have to declare its intentions in regard to jobs and the location of work. The trade unions or other employees' representatives will have the right to comment on that before the offeree company comes to a decision. The shareholders of the offeree company will need to know what the view of the employees is. None of this is law at the moment. We are about to deprive people of something of vital importance, unless we carry this!

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, my question was whether this concerns an editorial error and the word 'social' can be replaced by 'societal'. If so, we can withdraw the attempt at a split vote.

Political group: PSE