GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Many of the complaints made by Europe’s citizens about the Member States’ environment policies are based on the one hand on the lack of transparency by the institutions in terms of informing the public and, on the other, on the lack of consideration of the citizens’ opinions about projects that will have an impact on the environment. The fact that, in the wake of the Aarhus Convention, the Commission has legislated on public access to information in certain plans and programmes and on public access to justice is, therefore, extremely important. Greater public information and participation will not only add legitimacy to the decisions taken by our institutions but will also enhance the quality of these decisions. The directive that has been adopted today represents a significant step in this direction – the public dissemination of information will become the rule and the protection of information by the authorities will become a clearly defined exception. - Korhola report (A5-0435/2002) . – (IT) ‘There’s no harm in dreaming’, as the song goes. Well then, I dreamed of Mrs Korhola, who – I hope she will forgive me for explaining why I voted for the report in this way – was giving the citizens environmental information from an ‘information’ booth, in accordance with the provisions of the directive. In my dream, however, as well as giving environmental information, Mrs Korhola was giving information to pensioners too, and there is such a great, great need for this kind of information, as much or even greater need than for environmental information. I could therefore only vote for the report, in the hope that, next time, Mrs Korhola will present to us an equally significant result on a proposal to provide information to pensioners throughout Europe. I would now like to wish you, Mr President, and everybody listening to me a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, allow me to start by making a basic observation. Prison reforms are the hardest reforms of all to implement, not just in countries like Turkey, but in our own countries as well. We all know that. Prisons are always the Achilles heel, the weak point of a democracy. Even in the highly developed democracies of the European Union, the situation in the prisons is far from rosy, let alone democratic. Applied to Turkey, this means that the situation in the prisons in a country which, culturally speaking, still has to find its democratic feet, is a mirror image of this contradiction in terms. That is why I think it is very important to establish one thing: I do not know if it was the Council or the Commission which said that it called on Turkey to be generous in its application of the law. I think that, legally, this is the wrong approach. The law is one thing and generosity is another. To my mind, what is contradictory about reform in Turkey is that, basically, it leaves reform up to the prison administration, which then has the opportunity to apply it as it sees fit. With the situation as it is, this does nothing to inspire confidence in prisoners with painful experiences of the prison administration and the prison guards. That is the problem. How to create trust? Which his why I think – and we established this on our trip – that we need to find a solution quickly because the prisoners have changed their standpoint. They are not making so many incredibly complicated demands. Isolation cells to be opened at once, new arrangements to be made for visits by relatives and lawyers at once, medical attention from doctors of their choice, these are more or less their immediate demands in order to call off the hunger strike. That is why we call on Turkey, first, to be generous in implementing what is yet to come and to start by opening cells and doors so that the hunger strike can end. Secondly, to instigate a dialogue with the prisoners so as to clarify exactly what they want. It is important to recognise that. Thirdly – and essentially in my view – Turkey must make it clear that it is ready in the dialogue to acknowledge these people as people. On the other hand, we say to the organisations organising this strike that the decision to end the strike must be taken by the prisoners, not by some party leader or other. That is our demand because it is these people who are risking their lives, not the leaders in Brussels, who still have plenty to eat and drink.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, I wish to congratulate the rapporteur, and I think that this report really enables us to make progress on an issue of great significance politically, economically, and in terms of environmental and energy policy. Producing and utilising fuels derived from biomass is a political and economic alternative to importing oil. The transport sector's demand for energy will continue to grow. That is evident to all of us, as society is becoming ever more mobile and the number of vehicles on Europe's roads will also continue to increase dramatically after EU enlargement. Europe's economy and jobs are inevitably dependent on security of supply, so fiscal support is the right way ahead, as we can expect the production of fuels from biomass to completely replace the import of fuel oil as soon as a few decades hence. It is therefore right and proper for Europe-wide fiscal instruments to promote biofuels over a transitional period. A common internal market demands more than the development of instruments by some states and not by others. Because they contain a proportion of carbon dioxide and need to be mixed with petroleum, biofuels are currently subject to the duty levied on petroleum products. It is therefore also right that we recommend to the plenary that it should go beyond the Commission proposal and consider as a possible incentive not only reduced rates of duty but also actual exemption from it, in order to make progress with further deliberate promotion of biofuels. As fiscal benefits, whether in the form of reductions or exemptions, lead to marked cost reductions, the competitiveness of biofuels can be guaranteed. This promotion can simultaneously create jobs in agriculture and plant engineering, leading in turn to higher tax yields and social security contributions. In the final analysis, the production of biofuels is labour-intensive and has a greater impact on employment than the production of conventional fuels. More favourable fiscal treatment at Community level is in accordance with the principles of the internal market and will also tend to enhance the EU's competitiveness. There may be resultant innovations in the areas of process engineering, cultivation and harvesting, and also in the production of motor vehicles. Community-wide requirements for biofuels to be of a quality standard compatible with state-of-the-art motors would make it possible for motor engineering to advance to the point of producing the zero-emission car, which would probably be an export winner. All this enhances growth and creates jobs, as does the export of relevant products and processes to countries that are at present economically dependent on imported oil.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is now a year since the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. In our decision, supported unreservedly by my political group, we emphasise that measures to implement the Johannesburg programme are necessary. That is not something we are now addressing for the first time. In Johannesburg, where many of us were disappointed by the results because they fell short of the European Union’s demands, we already knew what was required. There is, however, a chance, at least in the future, to make up some ground in this area if we can achieve many of the objectives we set ourselves in Johannesburg and if we can really achieve significant progress in a number of areas. I admit that we do not at present find specifically the best conditions in relation to our demand that, in particular, the European Union ought, in the future too, to play a pioneering role in issues of sustainable development. I am just thinking of the long discussions on chemicals policy and also in other important areas. I also know that, in this area, it is not so much the Commission that is putting the brakes on but, without a doubt, the Member States too. Nor, however, is the current Presidency, whose representatives in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy painted a very sad picture a few weeks ago – also in connection with the issue of sustainable development – the best advertisement when we at present talk about this topic. I was disturbed to learn that the Presidency has apparently either not understood, or not wanted to understand, either the principle of shared responsibility on the part of the developed and developing countries or the principle of different degrees of responsibility according to which, if we cause pollution, we must assume greater responsibility. The Commissioner has already mentioned a number of the points I wanted to raise. She has informed us about the water and energy initiatives. I am already delighted about the comprehensive reports on these subjects, because the very participants in this House’s parliamentary delegation were very anxious that the projects concerned were too large or that, for example, renewable energy would be under-represented in the energy initiative and that traditional forms of energy would be accorded undue support. I hope that, in the near future, we can count upon a proposal by the Commission on chemicals policy. One objective of Johannesburg was, of course, to reverse the trend by 2020 where dangerous chemicals are concerned. I believe that the problems with chemicals policy also show that having our own committee on sustainable development does not help us out of the difficulties. There are very detailed discussions, and we must work through one topic after another and, in the case of every topic – including chemicals policy – bear in mind the need for sustainable development.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, my Group supports Mr Bonde’s proposal for deferment, although this agreement undeniably contains some very worthwhile improvements to Parliament’s rights regarding, for example, talks on international agreements and its participation in the intergovernmental conference. However, we cannot accept the way in which the Council has interfered in relations between the Commission and Parliament now that the talks are over. The Council asked, pressed, and actually forced the Commission to remove from the agreement the text that would have required that Member States, the institutions and international organisations would, under this agreement, have had to explain their unwillingness to release some confidential information. In our opinion, this is absolutely intolerable. Madam President, I have reason to suspect that this is the direct consequence of the Feira summit. There it was decided that NATO would release secret information for the purpose of making joint military plans, which would appear to be a clear attempt to exclude both the Commission and Parliament from a common security and defence policy. We thus need a clear explanation from the Council as to why this is happening. In addition, Madam President, we have to improve the rights of rapporteurs to acquire confidential information, and perhaps a deferment would also provide the opportunity to establish this aspect of the matter. We thus do not support this text such as it is now since the last changes were made to it, and it would be wisest if we were to take a little extra time over the issue. (Applause)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, last week, the former governor of the Colombian province of Antioquia, Mr Gaviria, and his peace adviser, Mr Echeverri, with both of whom a delegation from this Parliament had met, were, together with eight other people belonging to the army and the state security services, shamefully assassinated by the guerrilla forces of the Colombian FARC who had been holding them prisoner under cruel conditions. These events, which have caused an upheaval in the country, again make clear the true criminal character of this organisation – which is still holding the presidential candidate, Íngrid Betancourt, captive – and make it abundantly clear how wise it was to decide to include it on the European Union’s list of terrorist organisations. I would, for all these reasons, ask you, on behalf of this Assembly, to convey to Colombia’s legitimate authorities our solidarity with the victims’ families and our active commitment to the cause of peace in that country.

Political group: PPE-DE
The only reason we voted in favour of this joint motion for a resolution is the stance adopted in favour of abolishing the death penalty and the affirmation of a few basic principles regarding the equality of women, the treatment of children and opposition to racial discrimination. Although the resolution explicitly mentions a number of countries, such as Tibet, Chine, Afghanistan, Papua-New Guinea and Chechnya, where human rights are effectively violated in many, if not all areas, not a word is said regarding the major powers, the European Union in particular, which, while they do not necessarily violate human rights at home, violate them in their former colonies, either directly or by giving protection to dictators that ride roughshod over human rights. When human rights appeals come from those suffering from the lack of human rights or from associations working genuinely to relieve the burden of oppression, at least in the areas they are responsible for, we show our solidarity. Yet, as far as the major powers which are responsible for the exploitation and oppression of the greater part of the world, and their political representatives, are concerned, references to human rights are, generally speaking, nothing more than hypocritical declarations contradicted by their diplomatic and military action and by those ‘reasons of state’ generally used as a front to conceal the sordid interests of major financial groups that do not care one bit about human beings or their rights. - Hedkvist Petersen Report (A5-0381/2000)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, yesterday once again eleven people from Africa died off the Spanish coast when their boat sank. We cannot remain indifferent to this tragedy, which occurs very often: although it will be difficult, we must seek a solution so that these people do not feel obliged to try to reach European territory in such a dramatic, and so often tragic, way. I believe it is honourable to remember this now, under these circumstances.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the remarks by our rapporteurs illustrate that the acceding countries have made major efforts, but that they still have a great deal to do in terms of the fight against corruption, fraud and human trafficking, and particularly in terms of the application of legislation. The most painful paragraphs in various reports pertain to the Roma, who are being discriminated against, disadvantaged and treated as second-class citizens everywhere, including in the current Member States. In Slovakia, this has already culminated in riots and even a fatality, mainly on account of the reforms implemented in Slovakia, which, among other things, mean that social security benefit has been capped and is no longer dependent on the number of family members. This directly affecting the Roma, with their huge families, who believe that the measure is directed against them. That is why I should like to call for more effective measures not only in Slovakia but also elsewhere in order to improve the plight of the Roma. Moreover, the measures should not only be put in place for the Roma, but above all, they must be implemented by them, for they do not participate enough in the improvement of their own fate and their own emancipation.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I voted in favour of the Turmes report. I think it was an excellent report, and I would like to praise Mr Turmes very highly once again. Without his commitment this report would not have been so outstanding. The main achievement in this report is the introduction of electricity ‘labelling’, so that consumers will in future know where their electricity comes from and how it is produced, so that they will finally be able to decide if they want to buy nuclear electricity or electricity generated from renewables. This also gives consumers an opportunity to participate in decisions about environmental policy, and that is a tremendous achievement. Because we know that only freedom of choice creates responsible citizens capable of mature judgment, and such responsible citizens conversely want that freedom of choice so that they can take part in decision-making. I hope that it will be possible to implement this in the Member States in a practical way so that consumers really are given this opportunity. Otherwise, I am also very happy of course that we have finally found a means of ensuring that competition law also applies to nuclear energy. It is time we finally stripped nuclear energy of its privileges. It should not be possible, in a liberalised internal market, for nuclear energy to have a special status and not to be subject to competition law.

Political group: Verts-ALE
The report rightly condemns the human rights situation in many countries. However, it is unfortunate that the Maghreb countries as well as Israel are strangely absent. Indeed, 2002 marked a worrying, repressive turning point in those countries, particularly with regard to freedom of expression: detention of and judicial proceedings against leaders of the Kabylie citizens’ movement in Algeria and now attacks on the freedom of the press; imprisonment of an Internet journalist in Tunisia; censorship and the charging of journalist Ali Lmrabet in Morocco; and attacks carried out by the Moroccan authorities in Western Sahara. In the West Bank, the building of the wall of shame represents serious infringement of the Palestinian people’s right to move freely and right to land; it poses a threat to human rights and to peace. Finally, in many countries, the supposed fight against terrorism provides an excuse for security and repressive measures. This must be resisted. Moreover, it is up to us to ensure that the calling into question of international law, which has been dangerously trivialised by the American authorities, does not lead to a world where economic and political interests always take priority over the rights of individuals and peoples.

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I do not want to open a debate on this matter, but as you rightly said, this is a matter of constitutional concern. Moreover, it is part of the legislative procedure. It would be very useful for the House to obtain information from the presidency of the Council regarding the reasons behind and the justifications for the four previously mentioned governments' opposition to the Statute. We could then, perhaps, make progress. At this moment we do not know the reservations these governments have.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, this is indeed a significant agreement. It is the first time the European Union has negotiated an agreement of this nature in its own right. A precedent is being set. In my view therefore the concerns raised by the Chairman of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs concerning the conduct of negotiations and approval of the agreement are entirely justified, and I support his views. I believe Mr Hernández Mollar has done good work. I would also like to congratulate him on his presentation, on what he was explaining to us. Regarding content, I think it would be very positive to come to an agreement with the United States. It is however impossible to disregard the differences between our two systems. In particular, it is impossible to disregard the death penalty. The reservation on extradition is therefore quite clear. I believe the situation concerning legal cooperation is less clear, and consequently find Article 9 inadequate. I do not think it is reasonable either that a request submitted by a Member State should not take precedence over one submitted by a third country, as stated in Article 10. I also have problems regarding the United States position on the International Criminal Court. The same is true of other European states. I believe the text of the agreement should make it clear that a request submitted by the International Criminal Court takes precedence over one submitted by a third country. It would be ridiculous for this not to be the case when the European arrest warrant takes precedence even over a Member State’s request. Finally, I should like to revisit the issue of the political wisdom of signing the agreement without dealing with the situation in Guantánamo. I do not believe it would be wise to do so. Accordingly, I shall support the view that signature should be conditional on finding a solution to a problem affecting many European citizens. We are actually unaware of how many of our citizens are being held in Guantánamo together with citizens of other countries around the world. I find the situation quite unacceptable. I very much hope that the Member States and Community institutions will really pull out all the stops. Habeas corpus really is a basic right. It is enshrined in all the conventions. Politically, we simply cannot enter into a special agreement with a third country that continues to hold people in these conditions.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I should like briefly to raise one matter which concerns me. You know that I hold you in high esteem and I also fully supported very many of the points which you made in your speech in Helsinki. There is one point which could create a misunderstanding. Twice in your speech you spoke of cultural integration in connection with Turkey's possible membership or candidate status. Given that this issue is highly sensitive and that a parliamentary delegation has just returned from a short trip to Turkey, I wanted to ask you, Madam President, to clarify this matter, in particular with a view to the fact that official statements have already been made that the European Union is a Christian community. Did your reference to cultural integration encompass this aspect? Perhaps you could shed some light on this because I have no desire to move closer to the Islamic religion or culture, nor is it likely that we can demand movement in the opposite direction. In any event, it would appear that for some of us, at least, this concept of cultural integration in connection with Turkey requires further explanation. I would be very grateful if you could clarify this.

Political group: PSE
Scientific research has become an essential instrument in implementing the common fisheries policy and is crucial to the sustainable management of resources. The limits placed on fishing in the EU have had devastating socio-economic consequences. Portugal has been particularly hard hit by such measures, especially in the conversion of activities and in the destruction of large parts of the national fishing fleet. I see the consequences of fisheries management measures every day in the ports and fish markets of my region and I am furious that the Commission continues to pursue the same policy, without having any evaluation carried out into the socio-economic impact of implementing these measures. It is therefore important that these special arrangements, given their irreversibility, are duly justified in thorough scientific reports containing highly credible information on the development of resources. Given the lack of objective information, current scientific reports give rise to conflicting interpretations on the part of Member States, thereby counteracting the effects of measures to protect fisheries resources. I should like to take this opportunity to welcome the work of the rapporteur. I share his concern about the lack of scientific advice on fishing, and about the scarcity of financial and human resources. I also endorse the need to strengthen the ties between science and industry, thus giving the final results greater practicability.

Political group: PPE-DE