GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, I would like to start with very warm thanks to Mr Moreira Da Silva, who was a superb rapporteur, and he has produced a fine report. ET, Emission tradit is a strange unknown being from a strange unknown star. We do not yet know whether to fear it or love it. I have, though, attempted to give this being a rather more human face and have brought in a series of amendments, some of which have also been adopted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. Amendment No 2: if the authorities already have to update this by making various changes to the installations, then please let this happen with the operators' agreement. The Commission states in its draft that it will stipulate a harmonised method of allocation for the period beginning on 1 January 2008. I would rather that they did not. I believe that Parliament has the right to be involved in this by way of the codecision procedure. My concern in Amendment No 30 is that the allocation of allowances to new installations should, in principle, be harmonised across the EU. My Amendment No 37 is particularly important. This has to do with need for the Member States to ensure that the operators of installations can, within the relevant periods, bring forward allowances or put them aside for a subsequent year. This strikes me as very, very important, and makes things a bit more workable. It is my belief that none of us needs to fear this draft. After all, we are dealing only with the period from 2005 to the end of 2010, which the Commission has already designated as a sort of test run. Fear not, my good brave Mr Langen; we can keep on changing all this. I am sure that it will be only after today's vote that we will really get started on a major discussion process.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as well as the legal considerations that I mentioned during the general debate on Mrs Breyer’s report, I would like to stress that the reason why my group and myself voted in favour of this report is also the extraordinarily far-reaching importance of the texts submitted for vote by Parliament. One of the reasons why Europe has shown exemplary development across the board, one of the reasons for this balanced development and for the high quality farming industry which has always accompanied Europe’s economic development is precisely the fact that Europe has always had inexhaustible – in that they are infinitely renewable – resources of the precious liquid which keeps us alive. Both the quality and the quantity of water resources are now at risk from senseless and rapidly increasing amounts of pollution, which has been virtually uncontrollable over the last few centuries. Yet, dangerous amounts of resources are being wasted at the very time when, due to the explosion in the planet’s population, it is proving difficult to provide adequate water supplies to the six billion people who live on this planet today and, all the more so, to the extra eight billion people who could potentially be living here in 30 years’ time, in other words, in just one generation. None of the Member States, none of our regions can hope to avoid being pressurised on these two issues, which indicates how much we need the Commission’s initiative, Parliament’s vote and the Council’s agreement in order to prepare for the future, in general, and for Europe’s future in particular.

Political group: PSE
The establishment of the single market and the consequent liberalisation of the road transport sector and of short-sea shipping in the Union have led to stiffer competition and to a substantial increase in the number of cases in which companies attempt to gain a competitive advantage by failing to comply with Community legislation on driving and rest periods, as can be deduced from the significant increase in infringements recorded. Imposing rules for monitoring the correct implementation of provisions on working time should be seen, therefore, against the backdrop not only of protecting drivers’ rights, but also of competition and road safety. We therefore rejected the amendments seeking to remove from the scope of this directive control over the maximum weekly working time, night working hours, weekly rest periods and driving times between these rest periods and a two-weekly limitation of driving hours as proposed by the Commission in Annex 1. I must state my unhappiness at the Council’s ongoing failure to present its common position on adopting a regulation on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport, a matter on which the EP delivered an opinion in January 2003. I also wish to congratulate the rapporteur on his work. - Report: Deprez (A5-0267/2004)

Political group: GUE-NGL
Mr President, the review of the common fisheries policy gives us a chance to guide the future of fisheries in the European Union over the next ten years and we have to get this right. The CFP has not yet achieved what it set out to achieve, and that is a sustainable fisheries sector. Instead we have a situation where our fish stocks have been depleted and our seas polluted, while our technological capacity to fish has increased beyond recognition. The cornerstone of the new CFP has to be environmental and economic sustainability. One way of achieving this is to recognise the CFP's regional dimension. We should increase industry involvement in fisheries management and conservation, allowing for an improvement of dialogue between fishermen and scientists. Sustainability means that we have to take the environmental dimension of fisheries management seriously. However, this has to be coupled with clearer procedures for responding quickly to conservation emergencies. We should retain the principle of relative stability, but also ensure greater effectiveness and consistency in the control and enforcement of EU requirements, while attempting to simplify the burden of control on fishermen. As we know there are still weaknesses in inspection and control, and the inspection structure and coordinated approach must be welcomed. However, the use of uniform penalty procedures will require careful examination. The area of fisheries agreements which Mr Lannoye talked about also needs to be reviewed. Development considerations, poverty reduction and environmental impact are key considerations. There have been many examples where local fishermen in some of the world's poorest areas can no longer fish. When they cannot fish, they do not eat. Reform is essential. A lot has to be done in a very short time, but there is too much at stake for it to fail. I hope that this time next year, when we return for the first part-session in 2003, we will see a newly reformed CFP fit for the future.

Political group: PSE
Although access to water was recently declared a human right, the number of people in the world without drinking water today stands at 1.7 million, a figure whose increase has been uninterrupted in recent years. We need to recognise the causes of the lack of drinking water and fight them: whether it be high productivity and intensive farming, economies directed towards growing crops for export, which often compromise the development of the local economy or the liberalisation of public services in the water sector, a condition often imposed by the World Bank or the IMF on countries in the South to benefit from loans. The costs of water services have also become inaccessible for the poorest people. To remedy these discrepancies, we want new patterns of production and consumption to be implemented, in the North as in the South, based on long-term water management. We want to advance environmental farming and new irrigation systems. In light of the tragedy that people have gone through and the totally insufficient responses given to date, the establishment of a European Water Fund for the ACP countries is a good initiative. Access to drinking water and purification services needs to be determined by national authorities with the involvement, through associations and civil society movements, of those people affected. Report: Morgantini (A5-0277/2003)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, the procedure followed in drawing up this resolution was rather strange and has presented difficulties for all of us. Clearly, the fight against terrorism currently has aspects of both internal and foreign policy, and I would not like to see the importance of the work carried out by my own committee diminished. I would therefore ask you to allow Mr Hernández Mollar to speak before I do. If this is impossible under the Rules of Procedure, I am prepared to exchange my scheduled slot with his, which I would not have thought would cause any major problems for the staff.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I voted for this report, which is the first Alyssandrakis report on radio frequencies, which are nowadays used chiefly to advance mobile phone communications technology. This directive also has some shortcomings, for there is insufficient focus on adaptation, teaching, refresher courses and the use of these new communications systems by pensioners and the elderly. I am not referring to pensioners and the elderly in general, but, in this case, I am referring to my mother. My mother lives in Rome. She is 85 years old, it is true, but I have not yet managed to persuade her to let me give her a mobile phone because she would not know how to use it. She would find it extremely useful and also a saving, but she will not be persuaded. I offered to teach her, but she refused. This means that the elderly are not able to benefit from progress. - Alyssandrakis report (A5-0119/2000)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, for us the problem of implementation should be a shared problem, and I personally cannot accept what Commissioner Barnier has said, when he simply washes his hands of the problems of four or five Member States. The problem is a shared one, the solution is a shared one. The fact that we have EUR 100 billion of outstanding commitments should be a problem for all the Community's institutions. We cannot accept the premise that it is the sole responsibility of those Member States. We certainly want to see action by all the institutions, including the Commission, and this Parliament in particular, as a matter of urgency. Turning to transport, we want to see action quickly here too. In particular, we want to see a reinstatement of the cuts of EUR 1 million proposed by the Commission in overland transport safety. It is absurd to propose to cut accidents on the roads by 50% in 8 years and yet cut the budget in that key area. Thirdly, we want to see a reinstatement of the 20% reduction proposed by the Commission in sustainable mobility. Again we talk a lot about the environment, but the very programmes that will help protect and preserve it will be cut if the Commissioner has his way. Fourth and finally, I agree with the Commission on the need for more transparency. At the moment my committee, which takes its job seriously in trying to scrutinise the budget, simply does not have the facts at its disposal to make a proper quantitative, as well as qualitative assessment, of what is happening to the budgets for transport and the Structural Funds. I hope that after this debate we can work harder to make sure that we can demonstrate to the European taxpayer that value for money is being given. IN THE CHAIR: GERHARD SCHMIDVice-President

Political group: PSE
Madam President, much has been said, but as a child who grew up in Belfast and spent thirty of my thirty-nine years in the violent conflict in my homeland, I personally want to mark today’s historic occasion. It is a historic day. I am deliberately sitting in John Hume’s seat today because, as a Nobel Prize Winner from this Parliament who has devoted his whole life to securing the peace process, I think it is important that we honour him since he is recuperating at home in Northern Ireland. (Applause) It is important to say today that the will of the people has been done in Northern Ireland. 71% of the people voted for peace, the politicians on all sides have been big enough to deliver that will of the people for future generations. I have to say in my case perhaps it was too late. I left Northern Ireland because there was no future, no jobs, no opportunities for young people, but I am delighted that today the future generations will have those opportunities, and Europe has played a critical role in that process.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I can be extremely brief. I thought the response by the Commissioner was encouraging on its own merits. I think he is right in stating that we in Parliament should make every effort not to obstruct procedures. I should point out, however, that we in Parliament have tried our hardest, using all the means at our disposal, to keep those budget lines up and running that enabled us to continue financing NGOs. This can only be stretched so far and speed is then of the essence. I would like to make one last point following on from the official reply by the Commissioner on the Intergovernmental Conference. It is, in fact, not so much the content of the present Treaty or present declarations which is at issue, in fact he is more concerned to adapt these declarations, presumably in such a way as to form a legal basis from them, so that a programme can be based on them. This is the problem, in fact, and I would ask the Commissioner whether it would be possible to give this matter further attention within the Commission. As such, we are thus not asking for a new treaty, but for some attention. Finally, because we are of course involved in the development of NGOs in the new Member States, in the context of enlargement, we believe that this should be given extremely high priority.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, representatives of the Commission and the Council, the volume of world trade has soared in recent decades. Despite the giant leaps forward, many problems remain unresolved and questions open with regard to world trade. One of the biggest and politically most difficult of these has been China’s accession to the WTO, and this same problem will again be associated with the implementation of the agreement in practice. As this is a matter of the world’s second largest economy and eleventh largest exporting country joining the most important institutional system for world trade, the importance of the issue cannot be emphasised too heavily. I agree with Mr Clegg as regards the impression one gets that the Commission and the Council have perhaps been rather too keen in this matter to refer to the Treaty of Amsterdam and hide behind formal requirements. I am, however, very satisfied that the Commission is in agreement with us that talks with China concerning its membership of the WTO are a matter that Parliament cannot pass over and that we will have this issue heard in this Chamber. The fact that the talks on accession will not lead to changing the legal framework does not lessen the importance of the issue. For that reason, an informal dialogue free from the exact wording of the basic agreement, which the Commissioner mentioned in his speech, is more crucial than ever before. It is in the interests of the European Union as a whole to support China in the reform of its economy, administration and legal system. It is sensible to implement the technical assistance package from the EU and the United States in a context of collaboration; this is necessary to guarantee the speedy and single-minded implementation of the reforms. Of the reforms in the public sector, that concerning state-owned companies is vital for continued economic growth in China. In this connection I will make my sole comment regarding content: the percentage of ownership by foreign companies was not fixed at the level the EU was aiming at. That was a very bad mistake. Another important political question is how the economic life of the country is to be reformed, as that is closely linked with the fate of China’s system as a whole.

Political group: PPE-DE
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the main points of the report presented by the chairman of the Committee on Budgets, Mr Wynn, have already been described. We can all, therefore, understand its importance. Reforming the budgetary procedure is by no means a technical issue that can only be handled by specialists. Quite the opposite: it is an eminently political subject: it concerns our ability to give substance to European integration and demonstrate our solidarity through action. I personally would simply like to remind the participants in the current negotiations of their responsibilities. That means going beyond the sterile little game of defending national privileges and territory in the short term. That kind of attitude never leads to successful negotiations, ending instead with lame compromises which, at the end of the day, do not satisfy anyone. It is time we looked to see where the true interests of Europeans as a whole lie. We need to create a virtuous circle where the concessions made by the various parties ultimately benefit everyone. If this state of mind is allowed to triumph, I think it will be possible to seize the opportunity provided by the Convention. Let us therefore have the political courage necessary to demand a genuine reform which, I reiterate, includes, specifically, removing the distinction between mandatory and non-mandatory spending, establishing a European tax and laying down uniform rules for all the Member States. The Convention must establish a genuine codecision procedure, within which framework Parliament and the Council can work together as equals to handle all aspects of the Community budget and the other financial instruments available to European politicians. This method alone will make it possible to strengthen the democratic nature of the European budget decisively and to bring the citizens closer to our institutions, as we want with all our hearts. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by congratulating Mr Jules Maaten on his first-class report. Smoking is a dangerous habit which even harms non-smokers, but at the end of the day, I am liberal enough to say that everyone should decide for themselves whether they smoke cigarettes, use dope, drink alcohol, or whatever. But it is up to the government to point out the harmful effects to addicts and other citizens. The tiny label of 10% which we have at present is not effective then. We need warnings which are much bigger. But 80% of new smokers are young people under the age of 18. The traditional warning that smoking harms your health cuts no ice with them. The warning that smoking causes impotence could possibly work, especially if it is illustrated, as young people take a great interest in sex. I would like to add one other point. Anyone who has seen the film “The Insider” knows that the cigarette industry adds ammonia and other substances in order to encourage addiction. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection has endorsed the green amendment in order to rule this out. Fellow MEPs, I would like to call on you to back Jules Maaten’s excellent report.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, the human rights situation in China has clearly deteriorated further. Hong Kong is a case apart: it also has a special “symptom value”. The flight of the Karmapa Lama brought into the spotlight an increase in religious persecution in China. This being the case, I say yes to China joining the WTO, but, hand in hand with that, we must call on that country to ratify the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Commitment to human rights through rhetoric is important; it is the first step. Other means must also be used for the EU to convey its concern, and we should particularly give our support to the critical statement to be made by the United States at the forthcoming UN Commission on Human Rights Conference.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Madam President, would you please bear in mind that our group is called ‘Group of the ’, that it has two components and that this is a new group and should be referred to as such.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, we will have to be very careful, when voting on the report on the Internal Market Strategy, not to turn Mr Miller’s work, which is in fact outstanding, on its head, so that this House ends up, after only a few weeks, overturning the decision it took in January on public services of general interest. Let me clarify what I mean by reference to our water. In January, we expressed our opposition to the unrestrained privatisation of basic services such as water and sewerage, as well as health services and education. We set down in writing our recognition that decisions on these things have to be taken, if at all possible, close to the citizen in towns and communities. Services of general interest are the business of the people who use them; they are not to be the plaything of an unrestricted market. That is the point that Mr Miller reiterated in his report on the Internal Market Strategy, using persuasive examples to warn of the dangers that ensue if, for example, we make our precious water nothing more than an ordinary item of merchandise. It was apparent from the deliberations in the committee, though, that there are powerful conservative and liberal elements who believe that there are more, and quicker, profits to be made out of the public services. This is meant to be Mr Miller’s report; we must make sure that it really is by, in the plenary, stopping them in their tracks. The amendments needed to make good the fudge for which the committee is responsible have been tabled. I ask you all to help ensure that our towns and communities are not stabbed in the back, which is what this unholy alliance between conservatives and liberals wants to happen.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I have an interest, though not a financial one, in this subject in that I am chairman of the Northern Energy Initiative, a company which operates in the north-east of England, and has within it a renewable energy agency whose objective is to promote the development of renewable energies. The UK has a low proportion of electricity from renewable sources, I believe amongst the lowest. Yet the studies in my home region have demonstrated considerable potential for renewable projects: wind, including offshore, small hydro, landfill gas, waste incineration, biofuels and photovoltaics. It is important to have EU and national targets, but it is also important to have a European directive which will support efforts at local and regional level, where many of the decisions are actually taken. In general terms, there is a need to build up an awareness amongst architects and potential customers of the technologies that are available. Support for demonstration projects should be included in any directive. Larger developments often fail to get planning permission, sometimes because of public opposition. More proactive planning guidance, preferably linked to regional renewable targets, and feasibility studies would be helpful additions to the directive. Access to the grid system at fair prices is crucial. The disincentive of high capital costs of connection to the grid from remote renewable sites and the prevention of transmission penalties are other issues which the directive should tackle. I hope that the Commission will take note of these points. I would urge support for the amendment to assist the promotion of renewables in the remote islands of the Community. I am sure that this was an oversight in the drafting of the text. I have to say that the British Labour Members will vote against the exclusion of waste incineration from the definition of renewables, on the understanding that this refers to material which cannot be recycled.

Political group: PSE