GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today it is my great privilege to share with you my thoughts in the context of the European Union’s enlargement. Despite the festive atmosphere of recent days, those thoughts are concerned more with problems than ovations. First of all, coming from a country that has only just acceded, I do not feel morally entitled to say where the future borders of the European Union should lie, or when further enlargement should stop. At the same time, it would be equally morally unjustified to make insubstantial promises to our neighbours concerning their possible accession, in a situation where neither party is ready for it. The experience of relations with Turkey over the past 40 years would be a poor model to use for the development of relations with Ukraine today. Secondly, my background in academic circles has given me a clear understanding of what is accomplishable and what is not. A prerequisite for the enlargement of the European Union is an in-depth approach to integration. The Constitutional Treaty enables the involvement of ten new Member States in collective processes without compromising the fundamental principles and decision making of that union. If the Member States fail to ratify the Constitutional Treaty, we may have to accept that future enlargement may also come to a halt. Thirdly, I believe that all rounds of enlargement must be based on certain objective criteria. Once a round of enlargement has taken place, however, Member States should be treated equally. The restrictions on the free movement of workers imposed by some Member States is just as unwarranted as the imposition of stricter internal market regulations on new Member States. If the European Union accepts the splitting up of Cyprus, why then should it agree to the raising of Russian minority issues in Estonia and Latvia? That is just not logical. Fourthly, I welcome the European Union’s neighbourhood policy, which is a guarantee for stability and democratisation beyond its borders. I believe that the setting up of the ESDP mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the setting up of peace-keeping operations elsewhere in the world are signs of the European Union’s growing foreign policy agenda and of the attempts of Member States to speak with a single voice in the international arena. At the same time, I do not comprehend how countries such as Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Haiti have achieved a higher placing in the list of priorities than our close neighbours Moldova and Georgia. Yet this was the neighbourhood policy that was supposed to prepare the European Union for further enlargements. As you can see, ladies and gentlemen, there are a great number of problems to be solved. I sincerely hope that the enlarged European Union will not prove to be a disappointment for anyone.

Political group: PPE-DE
If we keep putting hormones in beef we will get a lot more muscle in our beef as well. The point I want to make to the Commissioner is this. While I welcome the question and the answer he has given – I agree with him that too much emphasis on summits is not necessarily a healthy thing – I wonder whether he will consider expanding the India/EU dialogue into an EU/Indian sub-continent dialogue? That is a role that the EU could usefully play – of bringing the Indians, Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, etc. together in that sub-continent to discuss their common problems and, in a sense, act as an external honest broker in dealings between the countries in that sub-region.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, as Mr Katiforis said introducing his admirable report, the facts before us reveal a state of affairs which nobody would have predicted a decade or so ago. It is a matter of great satisfaction to everybody in Europe and in this House that this should be the caseso, although I dare say it is wise to be, as both he and Mr von Wogau are, only cautiously optimistic. Pride often comes before a fall and we had better not be too proud too soon. I agree very much with what Mr Katiforis said about the question of public investment. The United Kingdom seems to have adopted an attitude of quite excessive horror about public investment, and I noticed that in yesterday’s Guardian newspaper Mr Bob Kiley, who ought to know, was predicting that the London Underground for which he is responsible, will, because of the Government’s insistance on the 'public-private investment partnership' whereby only private financiers are to come forward to invest, make the Tube worse and more expensive than it would have been under a programme of sensible public investment. I only wish that Mr Katiforis' words would be attended to in my own country. As has been said in the course of the debate, there is a matter of serious concern about the future pension liabilities of all the Member States. I speak with a certain interest since my own next birthday will be my sixtieth and I would be very glad, therefore, if we were to carry Amendment No 4 recommending the creation of special funds to deal with the future overhang of pension liabilities as that is one of the troubles that may beset us. But I welcome the report on behalf of my group and give Mr Katiforis our thanks and support.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I did not vote against the Barcelona European Council resolution, Mr President, because I am a staunch pro-European: I am in favour of Europe. I did not vote for it, either, Mr President, because there is something in this document that I do not find convincing: above all, I am not convinced by something in the statement and the results of the Barcelona European Council. What am I not convinced by? The fifteen Heads of State and Government in the Council have agreed to make workers work five years longer, from an average age of 57 to an average age of 62. They announced this brilliant proposal publicly. Bravo! Well done! But rather than making those workers who already have a job work longer, would it not be better to commit to getting the unemployed who do not have a job into work? There are so many of them, and they are mostly young. The Pensioners’ Party is therefore against raising the pensionable age, whether on a voluntary basis, as it should be, or on a mandatory basis, for as long as there is still a single person out of work in Europe.

Political group: PPE-DE
Thank you, Commissioner, for your extremely clear response to this question. We raised this question, which we consider to be important, because although today it concerns the circuit at Spa-Francorchamps, it will of course also concern others likewise affected by this directive on tobacco. We personally, by the way, are strongly in favour of the directive banning tobacco advertising. We feel it is very important for health problems to take precedence over the problems raised by banning tobacco advertising and we are extremely concerned about the International Automobile Federation’s position in this regard. As you emphasised, and as already discussed with Commissioner Byrne, the latter is currently examining the possibility of extending the ban on tobacco advertising worldwide, in other words, working with the WHO on this issue. Naturally, the measures currently taken by the automobile federations are extremely worrying for those who are trying to limit any encouragement of smoking, which we all know is extremely harmful to health. Furthermore, the automobile federations’ measures will lead to distortions with regard to employment, and, in particular, in the field of sport, which will also be extremely damaging.

Political group: Verts-ALE
I cannot vote for the report on the guidelines for the employment policies of Member States in its entirety. These guidelines do not actually wish to change in any way the situation whereby the economy is dictated by the market and by the multinationals. The fact is that the European Union has 20 million unemployed and 60 million people living in poverty and the guidelines do not envisage a single binding measure to prevent redundancies and lay-off plans. The only remedies proposed are aid funds for firms, but this aid does not, generally, create jobs. The so-called “employment” policy will continue to be, at best, restricted to a few empty phrases, or, at worst, it will continue to serve as a pretext for subsidising the employers with non-repayable funds, while no authoritarian measures are going to be taken to prevent major European firms implementing redundancies despite, at the same time, making profits. The fact that, in this specific area, the European States of the Union are refusing to bring in binding measures indicate that its prime concern is to sweep the obstacles from the path of big business, and that includes the social obstacles, so that they may maximise their profits and do nothing to put an end to unemployment.

Political group: GUE-NGL
The situation and the prospects of young farmers depend a great deal on the situation and prospects of Agriculture in the EU itself. As we all know, agriculture and the rural world are in decline, a decline in which the common agricultural policy has played a large part, promoting, as it does, land concentration, intensification of production, the gradual verticalisation of agricultural produce, all of which contribute to desertification and rural depopulation, as proved by a fall in the number of those employed and in the number of farms of around 22% and 20%, respectively, since 1990. Young farmers represent the new lifeblood of farms and are crucial to guaranteeing the future of agriculture in the various regions of the EU. The fall of around 28%, in the last decade, in farms whose owners are under 35 years of age proves the current negative prospects. Special measures for Community support for young farmers are therefore crucial, although the fundamental problem lies in the need for a sea change in the CAP. The Parish report, with which I broadly agree, despite its lack of coherence, does not focus on the necessary changes to policy. It toys with the existing framework. Nevertheless, three amendments which I tabled and which I believe to be important have been adopted. These are: - the need to commit ourselves to high-quality, sustainable agricultural production, which yields products which are safe and have a high added value, through support for biological agriculture, support for natural breeds and the consolidation of designations of origin and the creation of support mechanisms for regional products of special quality; - improving appropriations for rural development and structural funds to support and create broad public service networks, create infrastructures and give a boost to local markets in the rural world; - the need to simplify and integrate legislation affecting young farmers.

Political group: GUE-NGL
It can never be repeated often enough that the European Union must actively promote human rights and democracy in all its activities throughout the world. Respect for human rights must be a priority in all EU activities, including conflict prevention. Indeed we must ‘export’, as the saying goes, our common values like liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law – the EU’s founding principles. However, it is essential to respect national sovereignty and not lapse into interference. The European institutions must put their heads together and come up with more effective methods. The rapporteur is proposing that the Council and the Commission elaborate more focused common strategies on human rights. The EU Presidency is invited to ensure that the working programmes systematically include sections on well-defined policies and actions aimed at promoting human rights and democracy. Specific annual priorities should be established, matched with measures for implementation. These strategies must be subject to annual review and ensure consistency between the various Community policies involved. I think it is important for the European Parliament to improve its own structures for dealing with human rights issues. I welcome the suggestion to appoint a special representative, possibly a vice-chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. This person would deal with all human rights issues and would also ensure that individual cases of violation of human rights are followed up. (Explanation of vote shortened pursuant to Rule 137 of the Rules of Procedure)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to begin by joining in the almost universal chorus of praise and congratulations for Mr Martin. He does indeed deserve to be congratulated on the quality of his report. It contains an assessment of the present and anticipates a bright future for this important activity. The consolidation of the aquaculture sector in the field of world food production is highlighted, as is its role in helping to reduce the imbalance between imports and exports of fisheries’ products at Community level. The potential of aquaculture as a source of employment is also emphasised. Many new jobs directly or indirectly linked to aquaculture can be created in areas where few other industries exist. I refer to those regions that are heavily dependent on fishing, be they recognised as such or not. Galicia is a case in point. There are employment opportunities in aquaculture itself and in the processing and service industries. According to data supplied by the European Commission last September, the number of people employed has risen to 80 000. The future will not be all plain sailing. It should be recognised that there are certain risks involved, such as environmental pollution, and the transmission of diseases from farmed to wild fish. It is therefore necessary to work towards achieving a healthy environment. Greater vigilance is required, as are technological improvements. Of course, all this will also serve to promote the development of aquaculture itself. More specific provision for research is called for. Parliament must urge the Commission to make this available to ensure aquaculture enterprises can benefit from the support of national and Community programmes. In addition, the relevant regulations should be amended so that aid for setting up and developing enterprises can be forthcoming. Cofinancing of aid to facilitate the implementation of more environmentally friendly farming practices should also be possible. Commissioner, social dialogue between Member States must be promoted, with a view to introducing a code of good practice. Such a code could prevent price falls posing a threat to the sector. Mr President, allow me to mention Valentín Paz Andrade. He was a kind and generous native of Galicia. As they say in the local language, he was ‘un galego bo e xeneroso’. He loved his region and he loved the sea. Were he alive today he would be deeply saddened by the condition of the sea around Galicia and by how the sea has been affected by environmental disasters. Last July, at the Forum named after Valentín Paz Andrade in La Coruña in Galicia, it was stated that consumption of aquaculture products is set to double by 2010. IN THE CHAIR: MR IMBENIVice-President President. – The debate is closed.The vote will take place at 12 noon. (1)

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, as regards 320, I can go along with the proposed addition concerning quality as regards nutrition. I cannot however accept the deletions contained in this amendment. If those who tabled the amendment agree, I can accept the addition to the text.

Political group: PSE
draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. – Mr President, I should like to extend our congratulations to the rapporteur, Mr Bourlanges, and to the Chairman of the Committee on Budgets, Mr Wynn, on the way these proceedings have been conducted. Regretfully I cannot offer congratulations to the Council for their part in this process. The message the Foreign Affairs Committee has taken from the Council is that they believe we can only pay for Kosovo by taking money out of the hands of those who are even worse off than those in Kosovo. We want to rob the very poor in order to pay the slightly less poor. We want Africa to pay for the Balkans. I do not believe that is the message the EU should be sending out to the rest of the world. To find the EUR 500 million for Kosovo the Council has proposed an across-the-board cut of 10% in Category 4. Some cuts are even worse. For humanitarian aid, line B7-21, they are proposing a 20% cut. They are cutting EUR 70 million from NOVA: in other words, a 40% cut in assistance to Bosnia, so Bosnia has to pay for Kosovo. We are cutting support for the Middle East peace process just at the time where there is hope for a long-term solution to that process. What sort of political message is the European Union sending out about its commitment to that process? Of course there has to be financial responsibility and we have to set priorities, but a 10% cut across the board is not a proper setting of priorities. It is an exercise in indifference and irresponsibility. No wonder the EU’s reputation at the moment is not very high with the public. There are two other areas that the Foreign Affairs Committee would like to draw your attention to. First, we would like to see proper funding for the Royaumont Process, particularly ensuring that it is a Pillar I activity, not a Pillar II activity. Hence we propose that we should set up a line on the Stability Pact and take some money away from the Meda line in order to pay for it. Finally, we would also like your support for the conflict prevention network, set up as a result of Parliament’s work, particularly the work of Mr Rocard. Now that we have a similar organisation in the Council its work is even more important. I would urge your support for increased funding. I urge that financial prudence is not made an excuse to drive more people down into poverty.

Political group: PSE
Madam President, I condemn without reservation terrorism and murder. I agree with my colleagues that there is no reason for it and no-one has a right to carry out such acts. Terrorists choose violence rather than the ballot box, inflicting death and pain on innocent civilians, justifying their actions by flying the banner of religion, race or political sovereignty. Islam, like other great world religions, such as Judaism and Christianity, is a way of life for over one thousand million people in this world. These millions of Muslims, from Indonesia to Nigeria, from Central Asia to the leafy suburbs of California, knew nothing about Osama bin Laden before 11 September. For these millions and for Islam there is no place for terrorists like him or any others, whoever they are and wherever they come from. These terrorists have no authority to act on behalf of any people, race or religion. Therefore, we must fight terrorism and act against terrorists, not innocent civilians who pursue their lives peacefully and who should have the freedom to believe in a religion of their choice. Human life is precious and the death of innocent civilians, wherever it occurs, is simply not acceptable. Reason without passion is sterile, passion without reason is heat. Let us be firm and decisive. Let us target terrorism: let us remove the causes that conceive, feed and sustain terrorism.

Political group: PPE-DE
You will excuse me, Commissioner, for addressing you alone, but the Council benches are empty. I would like to say that I find the Council report very interesting. This Code of Conduct is also of major importance and this debate is very dignified, although we should ask ourselves how much we are actually achieving. We must have the courage to go deeper into certain complex issues which are still to be resolved. The first of these issues, which has already been mentioned by all those who have spoken, is the need to make this code law, that is to convert it into a legally binding instrument, seeing as, nowadays, everything depends on the good will of the Member States of the European Union, which are even free to decide whether or not to submit an annual report, which not all the Member States have chosen to do. Another complex issue which has yet to be resolved is that of a Community system of controlling the end use, the final recipient of the arms exported and the brokers who, in the arms trade, in arms trafficking – the word trafficking may be more appropriate, more to the point – are the real money-makers. It is a matter of serious concern that all this is not happening, that we do not have such a control facility, bearing in mind, for example, that the Taliban will probably be fighting in Afghanistan with arms supplied by the West, including some of the countries of the European Union. Lastly, the candidate countries. What guarantees will we have that the candidate countries will be able to respect this Code of Conduct properly? Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, as regards these questions, there is only one risk, which is engendered by our hypocrisy in disregarding – as has been pointed out – the great difference between a gentleman’s agreement and a law. I will therefore close by reiterating that, until the Code of Conduct becomes law, we will be at fault, and this report’s due reference to the values of democracy and the protection of human rights is likely to be reduced to a mere, ineffective appeal.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I just wanted to say that, like my fellow Member Bernd Posselt, I voted in favour of this motion for a resolution out of conviction. We also took the view that this motion for a resolution and this resolution could have been formulated in rounder, more comprehensive terms, with a broader platform, and we are sorry that this was not the case. Nonetheless, it is a step in the right direction and we hope that the plenary sittings and the committee responsible will not just discuss the issue of lesser-used languages, regional languages and minority languages in the Year of Languages, but will take a specific, targeted and positive approach to this problem in general, so that the problems which have arisen in the past from majorities or minorities remain a thing of the past and positive solutions to these problems can be found.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I just wanted to ask a few questions. I am sorry I was not here at the beginning. First of all, do you not think that Mr Heaton-Harris is giving a green light to fraudsters? In the past five years only two people have been prosecuted for fraud against the EU. If he does not come up with any alternatives, it is effectively giving the green light. I wonder if you could comment on that. Secondly, how do you convince those Member States which are resistant to the concept of European Public Prosecutor, for example my own country which, in my opinion, is misguided on this point? Thirdly, how will the European Public Prosecutor be appointed? And, fourthly, do you not agree that it is important not to proceed too quickly and do you accept also that this proposal is not enough? In other words, Eurojust will simply not work.

Political group: PSE