GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I will make three points. The first is that Mr Lagendijk’s report has interesting ideas, positive proposals, but I very much fear that it is a naïve report which cannot be implemented in the Balkans by the European Union’s policy. When basic factors such as respect of the Balkan borders are missing, when we play games with Montenegro and Kosovo, when this is coupled with the antagonism being shown towards the Milosevic regime, I think we are already undermining every positive effort we should be making. The European Union must conclude that it should respect the frontiers in the Balkans, and that is something quite different from its attitude towards Milosevic. The second point I want to stress is that financing part of the reconstruction plans by reducing agricultural expenditure must finally stop. I think that the donor conference makes this possible, or seems to at least. The third point I would like to make here is that there are parts of Greece, yes, unfortunately Greece, for example the Prefecture of Pieria, a tourist province in Central Macedonia, which has suffered enormous economic damage because tourists no longer come to that area. Such issues should be considered by the European Union as well.

Political group: GUE-NGL
My decision to vote against this Commission was not taken lightly. But having listened closely both to the debate here today, and to the answers we have been given from the Commissioners designate in the Parliamentary Hearings over the past few weeks, I still have a number of grave concerns and reservations. There are two aspects to these concerns: on the one side, the political side, of course we could not expect a Green Commission. But what we did expect was the demonstration of a greater awareness of how to prioritise and implement key issues of social justice and environmental sustainability. On the other side, the assessment of the Commissioners’ ability to live up to the enormous expectations that now lie upon them to introduce a very different kind of behaviour and culture in the new Commission, we did expect the demonstration of an ability to introduce genuine, far-reaching, radical reform. And so, in order to be able to vote in favour of this Commission, I would need to be able to say that, as a bloc, these are Commissioners whose commitment to introduce exactly such fundamental reforms I can endorse. I would need to be able to say that these are all Commissioners whose integrity and good judgement are beyond reproach. I would need to be able to say that these are Commissioners whom I, and the citizens of Europe, can wholeheartedly trust. I greatly regret that what I have heard and read over the past few weeks and months means that, for a number of Commissioners in the proposed new Commission, I cannot yet say these things. And because I cannot say these things, I cannot justify to the electorate who voted for me a vote in favour of this new Commission.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, there are many fine words in the report on combating terrorism. There are many fine words on safeguarding democracy and guaranteeing civil rights, and on the prevention of civil crises. The truth is, however, that we currently find ourselves in a crucial situation, in which the EU must make up its mind whether it wishes to follow the USA blindly, irrespective of what the latter may come up with in relation to Iraq. It is also worth addressing some of the concerns which my fellow Member, Baroness Ludford, expressed about pre-emptive strikes. We start to have a problem if we use these pretty words but act differently, and here I am thinking of civil rights in particular. The resolution gives its full approval for the EU’s anti-terrorism package, and that includes the EU’s list of terrorist organisations. We are therefore currently faced with a topical problem, namely that the National People’s Army and the Communist Party of the Philippines have presumably ended up on the EU’s list of terrorist organisations along with their leader José Maria Sison, who is incidentally in exile in the Netherlands. The problem is that these groups constitute a quite crucial part of the network involved in peace negotiations in the Philippines. This is incidentally a process which has been under way for many years. In any event, Parliament has adopted two resolutions which actively support this process, and I think Mr Haarder even voted for one of them. Now we are in the process of putting a vital player in a peace process on the EU’s list of terrorist organisations. If that does not go completely against all of the pretty words on crisis prevention, I do not know what does. We are creating a problem, and I would advise Commissioner Patten and Mr Haarder to re-read their Popper. There continue to be totalitarian regimes, to which resistance must be offered; and if we in the EU are unable to tell the difference between terrorists and freedom fighters, it is a very sad world for us all. I would like a definitive answer to the following questions: is it true that Sison, the NPA and the Communist Party of the Philippines are to be included on the EU’s list of terrorists? Is it true that, in so doing, we are busy dooming the whole of this peace process to failure? Has anyone given any consideration to how these fine words can be reconciled with the harsh reality?

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, I too would like to thank the outgoing Prodi Commission. I would also like to welcome and congratulate the incoming Commission. I think the incoming Commission will have to begin by tackling three main issues. First, it must repair relations with other European organisations and reinforce cooperation. I give you the example of the Council of Europe, an organisation that is especially close to me. It has its headquarters nearby and is where the idea of creating an agency for migration arose. The purpose of the latter is to find a solution to one of the most pressing concerns for this continent. Second, it must also be remembered that 22 countries remain outside the European Union. Europe has 800 million inhabitants. Of these, only 450 million are citizens of the Union. This is why it is important to create an agency for external relations. Further, it should be recalled that the Union has almost 4 000 kilometres of external borders. 1 150 kilometres of these are in my country, Poland. My final comment is addressed directly to the President. I would like to ask him how he envisions the future development of the relationship between the three main integrated groupings in the world. I refer to the Union, NAFTA, which is expanding to all of Latin America, and ASEAN and APEC, the Asian groupings

Political group: PSE
Madam President, the topic of today’s sitting is making trucks more environmentally friendly. In my book and, of course, in anyone else’s, this is a contradiction in terms. Trucks pollute. This is what they do. And since freight transport, in particular the international variety, invariably takes place by road, we cannot do much more than endeavour to reduce this harmfulness. As far as this is concerned, a compliment is in order for the Committee and the Council, but, above all, for the rapporteur. Given the number of amendments adopted in first reading, his role as a rapporteur can be seen as an outright success. We are very satisfied, even at this early stage, with the outcome before us. We are now dealing with the second reading of a directive, aspects of which will need to be introduced as early as the year 2000. This is why we are under a certain amount of time pressure. The rapporteur is re-opening a number of previous proposals. We can support him in many of those, but there is one section where we do not support the rapporteur but rather the Council’s common position, and this concerns the two-stage approach to the NOx limit value of EURO IV stage. I heard very clearly what the rapporteur says about this. However, the Group of the European Liberal, Democratic and Reform Party considers that if this limit value for 2006 is laid down now, it will, in practice, force industry to apply one specific technology, whilst we are not entirely convinced of the environmental friendliness of this technology. In our opinion, evaluation in 2002 and implementation in 2008 offer a better chance of using a more effective technology. Moreover, the Council proposes introducing a category of very environmentally friendly vehicles. We welcome this proposal in which these vehicles are linked with tax incentives. We also listened with great interest to the rapporteur with regard to the improvements he is intending to incorporate in this proposal. Also, we give our full backing to the rapporteur’s proposals to cut CO2 emissions so that we can achieve the Kyoto objectives, but also to the tax incentives for adapting older vehicles and the adjustment of test conditions, so that actual emissions of vehicles in use can be measured, albeit in the longer term.

Political group: ELDR
Madam President, we have all been deeply distressed by the illness of our colleague. I am immensely relieved that he appears not to be as ill as he appeared at the beginning. I am a nurse which is why I went up to see if I could give assistance. We have to recognise that, particularly when the weather gets as hot as it did this week, colleagues’ health is under a great deal of stress. It is unfortunate that it took a considerable time to get the stretcher to take Mr Staes out of the Chamber. I would propose on behalf of colleagues that we have immediate resuscitation equipment here in the Chamber in case such a distressing event occurs again. I am very glad that he is not as ill as he looked, but we must have resuscitative equipment in the House, given not only the conditions but some of our ages and I include myself in that. Many colleagues are finding it particularly difficult this week in the heat.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we have to start by clarifying whether patent laws are actually in place. The copyright must be valid in the country in which it is sold; that is to say, it must have been registered and granted there. Of course, things can always be manufactured in a country where there is no copyright on them, and there must be doubt as to whether, although they clearly bring benefits, the medicinal products have actually been patented in every country around the world; I really cannot imagine that they have been, but should that indeed be the case, it follows that compulsory licensing is the ideal approach when it comes to giving help quickly and in a consistent way. We must ask ourselves, though, what happens if a compulsory licence is actually granted. Will it solve all our problems? What about prevention and complete recovery? I think it self-evident that medicinal products need to be developed further, and that we have to focus primarily on creating incentives for research, rather than simply allowing ourselves to reduce the issue to patent rights and licences. When, moreover, the copyright has expired and compulsory licences have been granted, we politicians, too, will bear responsibility for universities and industry having incentives to carry out research. Another important step in the right direction would be to put out public invitations to tender several times in a given year, to safeguard the fundamental principle that sufferers from disease really should get the most modern and the most effective medication available. For if, in future, research in this area of medicinal products, and the marketing of them, ceases to be a viable business proposition, we will be faced with the problem of being able to offer medicinal products that may well be cheap, but are not as effective as they might be. What do we do then?

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Manders, and also the shadow rapporteur from my group, Mrs Niebler, for the effort they have made to work together and to confront the pressure from the industry and from governmental organisations. I believe that, at the moment, at a time when there have been numerous disasters in Europe, including the Prestige disaster, we must insist on the polluter pays principle. I will focus on two specific points of this important Directive. With regard to Article 9, which deals with exceptions, it should not be assumed that all exceptions and all authorisations lead to pollution. The establishment of exceptions, such as activities covered by permits, as well as activities covered by the state of the art, correspond to the principle of legal certainty and legitimate confidence, which are being upheld by numerous judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. Furthermore, this exception exclusively exempts damage caused by emissions and actions which fall within authorised parameters, and we should remember the principle of the IPPC Directive on the integrated control and prevention of pollution. I therefore believe that Amendment No 37 perfectly covers the activities permitted specifically and explicitly by the laws. With regard to financial guarantees, I believe that this is one of the key points of this report and that we must try to establish some sort of obligatory system of financial guarantees, on the part of the operators, in order to cover the responsibilities stemming from this Directive. Bearing in mind the fear of certain countries that the insurance companies cannot take on this responsibility, the step-by-step approach would undoubtedly allow the financial guarantee to be ensured and the possibility of insuring against environmental damage. The fear that small entrepreneurs may be harmed by the measure would be solved by means of the establishment of a minimum threshold or a minimum insurance. This is an important aspect of this Directive and I believe it is taken up appropriately in Amendment No 92, presented by our group.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I believe that this amendment of the agenda resolves an issue which remained somewhat in stalemate at the Conference of Presidents. I do not believe that there is excessive divergence between the political groups, because we consider the three issues on the agenda to be important and we could deal with two very important issues in a more balanced way in the morning: the issue of the conclusions of the temporary committee on ‘Echelon’ and the issue of terrorism. I believe that this would resolve an issue which we believe was not sufficiently clarified at the Conference of Presidents.

Political group: PSE
This joint motion for a resolution contains both good and bad. There are some protests against the war that Putin is leading in Chechnya but also self-congratulations on the progress made in the area of police cooperation, not to mention the hope that ‘the progress made in Russia to create a positive environment for the development of trade and investment by Russian and foreign companies’ will continue. We voted in favour of the amendments that protest against the war in Chechnya and abstained on the remainder of the resolution. It should be remembered that while the European Parliament is getting ready to speak out against ‘the human rights violations in Chechnya’, the European Heads of State, from Berlusconi to Chirac, are falling over each other to play host to Putin. It is true that ‘birds of a feather stick together’ and that the major Western states have as many and more wars of oppression to their name as Russia.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The Group of the , on whose behalf I am speaking, completely supports the report by Mr Fernández Martín on the conservation and sustainable management of tropical forests and other forests in developing countries. The Group of the is pleased to see the increase in the budget allocated to protecting tropical forests. In view of the alarming, relentless way they are being devastated, this sudden interest on the part of the European Union looks like a good start, but it is still quite a modest one considering the actual restoration requirements. Until now, indeed, the only attention paid to tropical forests has been a mere selfish reflex on the part of Westerners anxious to safeguard the forests that are the lungs of our planet, in a last ditch attempt of our industrialised societies to bind the wounds, without considering the indigenous peoples living in and off these forest areas, who are condemned to be sacrificed to the profits of the industrial groups exploiting their resources. We have the appalling example of the gold mines in French Guiana, which are laying waste to vast swathes of forest, causing the death of the flora, fauna and the indigenous peoples, which are all suffering from the mercury contaminating their soil, their sap or their bloodstream. This is a phenomenon that is continuing on a daily basis. The argument of concentrating entirely on economics as a last, desperate springboard for the development of Third World countries, which are unable to afford the luxury of environmental safeguards, is mere pettifoggery. There is no sustainable development except in the context of the responsible use of the environment. Similarly, we must point out the fallacy of the assertion of commercial interests that their forestry clearance activities contribute to combating the greenhouse effect. While claiming the same noble motive of environmental conservation, all that such theories are seeking to safeguard are the interests of a few major industrial groups. In the Hague, the European Union must refuse to be drawn into this trap, which would make it possible for tropical forests to be treated like coal mines and shamelessly exploited and for States to be released from their obligations in terms of combating the greenhouse effect. - Skinner report (A5-0222/2000)

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, to throw some light on this debate, I should like to quote you some figures that speak for themselves, first and foremost, with regard to Chad. It is the fifth poorest nation in the world. Life expectancy is less than 50 years. One child in five dies before the age of 5. The annual per capita income is 180 dollars. Cameroon scarcely fares any better, with an income per inhabitant of around 650 dollars. Why am I quoting you these figures? Simply because they express and illustrate the urgent need to offer these countries, particularly Chad, the development opportunities to which they are entitled. I believe that it is in this context that the great oil field project in the south of Chad and the construction of an oil pipeline between Chad and the Cameroon coast should be carefully examined. This project is now considered to be essential to the development of these two countries. Let us for a moment consider that the anticipated effects of operating these oil fields could increase the gross domestic product of Chad by almost 10 points and earn this country between 5 and 10 billion dollars. The World Bank, which has not yet issued its final opinion, is following this project very closely and is helping Chad to bring it to fruition. The three main points of discussion, i.e. the environment, social problems and the management of the income from the projects have been the subject of in-depth studies for almost four years. If this is anything to go by, 900 meetings have been held on the route of the oil pipeline, 40 000 people have given their opinions and 250 NGOs have been consulted. The director of one of these, the World Wide Fund for Nature, even said that in environmental terms, the project to install the oil pipeline is one of the best in the world. Nonetheless, we must, of course, continue to closely monitor the consequences of such a project and ensure that the absolute minimum amount of damage is done in environmental and human terms. That is the reason for the debate today. If, by chance, on completion of these additional studies, the World Bank, whose criticisms I find hard to understand, were to give an unfavourable opinion, it would be out of the question to continue. But, on the other hand, if the Bank did, in the end, support this programme, it would mean that our legitimate fears could be allayed. It would also mean that our attention would for once actually be focussed on the development of the poorer countries, which we discuss frequently in this House. Human rights, ladies and gentlemen, also mean rights to development.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, I was present at yesterday’s sitting but forgot to sign the attendance register. Would you please correct my mistake?

Political group: Verts-ALE
I should like to express my thanks and gratitude to you that Hungary has been able to become an integral part of the European Union. I express my thanks and gratitude to my own region too, to Ajka, in the County of Veszprém, that here today, in Parliament, I can talk to you in the language of my native country. This morning, during the Constitutional discussions, one Member of this House said that constitutional cooperation meant force. We know another type of expression for libertinism, which, for us, represented 45 years of isolation and the Iron Curtain. That is why we believe in cooperation. We must not just limit ourselves to cooperation relating to the environmental and health effects of cross-border sustainable development, but I can assure you that even in such cases we will be quite decisive. As a result of the Trianon Treaty, Hungary lost two-thirds of its land and one-third of its population and its minorities now live beyond its borders. That is why it is very important for Hungary that Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia should join and that the capabilities of the Ukraine and Serbia should be increased. It is very important for Hungary that the demographic deficit itself is eliminated in every region as soon as possible. The examples are too fresh of situations where minorities are in the majority at regional level, yet are still unable to exercise their autonomous rights. The examples of cases where minorities are deprived of their rights to vote and to be elected on the basis of various legally fabricated reasons are too fresh. The soon to be introduced Constitution will provide a further guarantee that the ruling powers will never have the chance, even in theory, to repeat this dreadful period of the twentieth century.

Political group: PPE-DE