GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
I would like to thank Mr Rocard for his initiative. Mr President, as representative of the Pensioners' Party – which is as good as blamed for the longer life expectancy of citizens and pensioners and therefore for this health service crisis – how could I fail to say a few words on this occasion. I have to say, even, that I am rather taken over by the subject for, to my eyes, Mr President, you resemble a chief physician, with a white coat, stethoscope and hammer to test the patient's reflexes. We are discussing public and private health care. But if public health care is working so well, why is it that in Italy, for example – and 'the voice of the people is the voice of God' – the people were saying that health insurance schemes take away your health and leave you dissatisfied? Why did the great Italian actor, Alberto Sordi, have such success with a film about the Italian health service, entitled 'The Family Doctor'? Why, in response to a question I put to him, did the great doctor, Christian Barnard, whom I had the good fortune to meet last week at a convention organised by Mr Nisticò, reply that when he performed the first heart transplant in South Africa it was in a private clinic? Why is it, as happened to me when I went to visit my dear mother – who is still alive, thank God – in a major public hospital in Rome, that we see people who are dying accommodated in the same wards as other patients who are happily eating their lunch or supper? Well then, this means that we need to reflect at great length upon the reasons why public health care is in such a state. In my opinion, it is because public health care is paid for before the patient is treated whereas private health care is paid for after and if the patient is treated. And so I and my pensioner friends call upon Commissioner Diamantopoulou to put on a doctor's white coat, to treat the European Union's poorly medical service and to make us better.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, Commissioner, I wish first of all to congratulate the Committee on Fisheries and most particularly its chairman, our esteemed fellow Member Struan Stevensen, on the aptness of this debate, because this is a debate on a matter that was selected in our Committee on Budgetary Control – as the Commissioner, in fact, is well aware – as the most important issue, the issue of budget underutilisation, which in 2001 totalled more than EUR 15 billion. I must also say that before I came to this debate today I looked at the latest data on the utilisation of this budget line, with which the Commission regularly provides us, and I discovered that, apart from initial advance payments, no interim payments have yet been recorded. This is the state of affairs after the programme has been in action for more than a year! I also think that this piece of data, more than any other, is extremely significant with regard to the difficulties that the programme is facing in getting off the ground. And as our colleagues explained to us so brilliantly, especially Mrs Miguélez Díaz, the issue is not the need to implement the programme. This need does exist, but the problem is that it is not given due consideration in the blueprint for the regulation, which is too cumbersome and was not drawn up with the reality of the situation in mind. I therefore call on the Commissioner to take due account of what our fellow Members have said, which I think is extraordinarily appropriate. We would find it extremely regrettable if we were to face yet another blatant case of budgetary underutilisation, of the inability of the European institutions to respond to a real need. I therefore call on the Commissioner to review this problem as thoroughly as possible.

Political group: PSE
Introducing high-performance and efficient services of general interest for all, that is to say services which play a full role in social and territorial cohesion, means not only acknowledging and asserting that these services of general interest are an essential goal of Member States’ economic and social policies and among the fundamental elements of our European model of society, but also that we adopt and defend the basic principles that serve as the operational basis of these services of general interest, namely the universality of services, continuity, affordability and quality. Without the adoption of certain amendments, including those relating to the framework directive, it is these principles themselves that are likely to fall by the wayside; there is a risk of the drift toward ultraliberalism caused by sectoral directives becoming the norm. I do not wish to take such a risk. Without voting on these amendments on the requirement of a framework directive, I rejected the text at the final vote.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, we are aghast at the large numbers who have fallen victim to these disastrous floods and I believe that it is the duty of the European Union, of the individual Member States and of the Commission to do all that we can now to give assistance to those affected and help them through this difficult time. Even though Algeria is further south than our homelands, we know that it can be cold and very wet in winter. That is why aid is absolutely essential and everything that can be done to reduce the suffering must be done, and it must be done unconditionally. This does not mean that we will not hope that something good will nevertheless come out of this terrible catastrophe and out of our provision of aid, namely that Algeria will find a way to really step up the necessary dialogue with those who want peace and freedom in that country. The sacrifices which have been made in Algeria, not only during the war against their colonial masters but also in recent years and months, are horrendous. The acts are horrendous, and it is high time that the government and the president of this country found a way out of the crisis. Expectations were high when Bouteflika was elected President, but there have also been many disappointments in recent months: disappointment that more is said than done; disappointment that the people are addressed ex cathedra and not consulted. The tragic events in Kabylia – a commission in Algeria itself investigated them and uncovered their causes, amongst other things – should be reason enough to change the dynamics of communication and political relations in Algeria. In the case of the unrest in Kabylia – which, of course, then spread to the whole country or to wide areas of it – it was simply not true that it was started by a handful of anarchists and others who were following foreign orders: the Algerian commission itself established that it was above all the inappropriate behaviour of the security forces which was responsible. That is why the tragic events of the last few days should also be seen as an opportunity in Algeria to try to pursue a different policy, a policy which consists of offering the people more opportunities and more chances, including economic and social ones. (Applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, a Bilderberg meeting will open in Versailles tomorrow. The reason I raise this issue is that a number of Commissioners - Monti, Liikanen, Solbes Mira, Verheugen, Vitorino and Bolkestein – have all in the past attended Bilderberg meetings. Indeed, Commissioner Prodi was actually a steering committee member in the eighties at the same time as Wim Duisenberg was the treasurer of Bilderberg. Another reason I have raised this issue is that I have submitted a priority written question through Parliament but whenever I raise the issue of Bilderberg I am sent from pillar to post. I should have had a reply on 25 April but still have not received one. The Bilderberg meeting is starting at the weekend. When I have tried to put an oral question in this Parliament or in the last one, the Commissioners have basically been afraid to answer. What I really want to know is whether the Commissioners attend these meetings in their own private capacity or whether they are representing the Commission. If they are representing the Commission, we need to know what happens at these Bilderberg meetings because at the end of the day this is a secret organisation which is deciding global policy without any input from the public. It is about time the doors of Bilderberg were opened and the public really knew what goes on, because most of the major players in the world today are all playing a part in Bilderberg. The President of this Parliament, Mr Cox, actually attended one of these meetings in Sweden a couple of years ago. The people need to know what happens at the Bilderberg meetings, and if I ask a question in good time the Commission should answer that question. There is no justification for the Commission not to answer it.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I would first of all address the Commissioner and say that I naturally welcome the present proposal. Secondly, I want to congratulate Mrs Roth-Behrendt on a very good piece of work. I also want to thank Mr Böge. I wish to support in principle all the amendments from the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection. Nowadays, we know a very great deal indeed about the living world. Life is not, however, complete, as it were, but is evolving all the time. It is evolving not only in a positive way, but also in a negative way. As time goes on, we are faced with new viruses and new problems. The BSE crisis is an example of such a phenomenon. There are, however, also many more examples. There are therefore two things which must be done. The first is the matter with which we are occupied at present, namely trying to ensure that we get the better both of BSE and of TSE, which is, of course, a broader concept. We must make sure that the situation does not occur again. However, we must also find ways of overcoming similar tragedies in the future. Such tragedies will clearly not occur in precisely this area but will crop up elsewhere. This illustrates what the present debate teaches us: that we must have comprehensive regulations for the whole of the common market constituted by the EU. We must have the same rules, monitored in the same way. Everyone must be treated the same. Understandable differences in attitudes have emerged in the course of the debates which we have conducted in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy and in the party groups and which are also being conducted here and now in this Chamber. I am thinking of the last intervention. The United Kingdom has been affected badly. I can well understand why people there have points of view as to how it might perhaps be possible to make savings. Allow me, however, to say something which is extremely important. We must never suffer for having looked to short-term economic gains at the risk of long-term security. There is a danger of the short-term economy’s taking over at the expense of reason and caution. To my party colleague, Mrs Attwooll, I have to say that I understand the current amendments very well but that I cannot support them. That would mean our becoming unclear and sending out false signals. I believe it is extremely important that when, in this context, we decide about this report, we send out a crystal clear signal about the firmness of our judgement on the issue of food safety. This is important prior to the forthcoming debate on the whole project entailed in the white paper which has been announced.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the committee agreed overwhelmingly on the need to restrict self-handling to ships' crew. Now, though, we have the problem that these expressions are used very differently in the various translations, not only the German, but also the English and French versions. As I see it, knowing that the basis must be the German text, the most correct and tidy translation is the English one, which refers to ‘regular seafaring crew’, enabling Parliament to make it abundantly clear that we are not talking about what is done on land, but only about what can be done by the ship's crew, using their own equipment, and nothing more. That is why I would like this made clear by the language used in the translations. ‘Seafaring crew’ and ‘Schiffsbesatzung’ would have the additional advantage over the expression used in the German version, in that ‘seemännische’ in German still has a very masculine ring to it, whilst ‘Schiffsbesatzung’ and ‘seafaring crew’ could be said to be gender-neutral, which would have an advantage in terms of gender mainstreaming. (Loud applause)

Political group: PSE
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our starting point is based on the need to combat illegal immigration and, in particular, the resulting forms of exploitation. The situation has been exacerbated, not only because it has proved to be extremely lucrative and less risky than other forms of trafficking, such as drugs trafficking, for example, but also because this activity actually benefits from shortcomings in the legislation and action of Member States and from all the factors that allow illegal immigrants to enter and remain in these countries. The proposal now before us, which is intended to strengthen the fight against illegal immigrants entering and staying, must pay particular attention to two factors: first of all, the issue of employers’ responsibility and the consequences that using an illegal workforce may entail. We must look at the situations in our own Member States with regard to the illegal employment market – and the issue of trafficking in human beings, which must be fought hard, paying particular attention to the trafficking of women and children for the purpose of sexual exploitation, which is one of the most odious aspects of this type of trafficking. Tragic events such as the one that took place in Dover last June or those that have come to light following the successful ‘Cathedral’ police operation are situations that no democratic society can tolerate. What we must do is target those who assist illegal immigration. It is crucial that each Member State adopts the necessary measures to ensure that the deliberate facilitation of the unauthorised entry, movement and residence of immigrants is considered to be an offence punishable by effective, proportionate, dissuasive criminal penalties. The European Union is now facing new challenges caused by migratory flows in evidence throughout the world. We must address these challenges as one wide-ranging issue. The Member States must have a common immigration and asylum policy that is appropriate to their demographic, economic and humanitarian needs.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I must begin by informing the House that I am a lawyer by profession, although my membership of the Portuguese Bar Association has been suspended at my request. I shall therefore only speak from this specific view point, because I feel that the amendment to Article 3 in the Roure report that we are discussing entails, in the very way in which the compromise is worded, an unacceptable attack on the professional confidentiality of lawyers. Professional confidentiality is the basic premise, the correlative and the consequence of a relationship of trust that is established between lawyers and their clients. This applies regardless of whether or not there is a legal obligation, because confidentiality stems from the simple fact that the client is seeking advice from the lawyer or is simply treating them as a confidant. Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which has recently been adopted, stipulates that everyone has the right to be advised, defended and represented in the law and Article 48 states that respect for the right of the defence of anyone who has been charged shall be guaranteed. Seen in this light, professional confidentiality is a lawyer’s inalienable duty. Where would we end up if, in this context, lawyers were not bound to maintain this confidentiality or if they were forced to become an informer rather than a legal counsel? Lawyers should not have to bear the responsibility for the inefficiency or the weakness of the authorities charged with investigating crimes of money laundering or any other type of crime. With regard to a compromise situation on this issue, there are two options: either the article in question refers to people who concentrate on certain activities and does not need to mention lawyers or any other professional category, or it refers to lawyers, creating a situation which in itself threatens professional confidentiality, however much the article specifies or defines the activities to which it refers. There is no reason to assume that, if a lawyer is acting as a financial adviser, he or she is not exercising his or her profession. To conclude, Mr President, I shall limit myself to saying that the position of my country’s Bar Association on this issue is quite clear: professional confidentiality is the cornerstone and the fundamental duty of the lawyer. Any lawyer accused of carrying out or participating in criminal practices can be prosecuted, like any other citizen, but no lawyer can be forced to state or provide information on facts they have learned in the exercise of their professional activity. Lawyers are forbidden to do anything that is not strictly legal. The Bar Association has final and binding authority on issues of professional confidentiality and it falls to that body to decide whether or not to authorise – in exceptional cases – the disclosure of information at the request of the courts. For all of these reasons, Mr President, I shall vote against the amendment to Article 3, even as a compromise wording for the legislative proposal.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, if the political problems cannot be resolved at long last, the issue of Cyprus has the potential to derail the entire enlargement process or to leave us in the ridiculous situation where hundreds of thousands of Turkish Cypriots are notionally EU citizens without having being consulted, while at the same time facing EU sanctions of a political and economic nature. We cannot afford to close our eyes to the reality. I look forward to Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot politicians sitting alongside us as parliamentarians in this Chamber and to the creation of a bi-zonal federal state. But in discussing this issue, it is not acceptable simply to say that the problems of Cyprus started with the Turkish invasion in 1974 without mentioning the divisions of the island from 1963 when Greek Cypriots murdered Turkish Cypriots. If there is to be true reconciliation between these peoples, then complete objectivity is needed and in this report before us that is too sadly lacking.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, as you must know, a lot of exciting things are happening in Cuba right now. There is a major referendum project and calls for there to be a vote on introducing democracy. Fidel Castro’s response to this has been to make socialism an inescapable part of the constitution, something which is a very serious matter. The Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party has arranged a meeting for Thursday in this building. We have invited four liberal friends from Cuba who are working entirely peacefully on issues of democratisation. The Cuban Government has, however, denied them permission to travel. They are therefore invited by the European Parliament but are not allowed to leave Cuba, something I find deeply disquieting. I hope that you can perhaps protest about their treatment to the Cuban authorities.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, it is well known that the textiles and clothing industry still has a considerable presence in the enlarged EU, employing around 2.7 million people, mainly women, even after shedding some 850 000 jobs and losing many thousands of businesses between 1990 and 2001. Consequently, the threatened total abolition of import quotas next 1 January may seriously hamper development and exacerbate unemployment, especially in areas with the highest concentration of textiles and clothing companies, such as the North and Beiras regions of Portugal. There is currently a serious problem of multinationals relocating; in my home town of Vila Nova de Gaia, for example, there is a German company, Brax Portugal, threatening to close down within days and to lay off 450 workers, mainly women. This is a serious problem that is repeated more or less throughout Portugal. It must be borne in mind that the textiles and clothing industry is of major strategic importance to the EU with great prospects for the future, and that it can make a major contribution towards promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion. It may also, however, cause serious unemployment and hamper development unless we adopt appropriate measures to ensure that such problems do not arise in the future. Hence the proposals that we have tabled, promoting the interests of the production sector, given that a cohesive whole depends on all parts of the chain. The aim is to ensure the survival both of mid-range products and of those with a high added value, and to guarantee job prospects. It is therefore essential that the Commission present a concrete, cohesive and clearly defined action plan, in terms of instruments, financial resources and timetable. Particular attention should be paid in such an action plan to encouraging innovation and using new technology in the sector, to strengthening interaction between the various sectors of the industry, to carrying out an extensive programme of vocational training, to modernising and strengthening support for small and medium-sized enterprises and to protecting the environment. A Community programme must also be established, with suitable support mechanisms, especially for those less-favoured regions that depend on the sector. A sectoral approach must also be adopted for the textiles and clothing sector, specifically within the framework of negotiations of the World Trade Organisation.

Political group: GUE-NGL
I am grateful to you for allowing this question to be taken. I hear with interest what the Commissioner has to say, but she will know very well that there is no comfort in that response for many lecturers in the United Kingdom who assumed that they were going to be guaranteed the rights they had in their previous employment. They thought that under the Acquired Rights Directive they had some hope of protection of their rights. The result has been that those who chose to use those rights have seen ten years of pay freeze, ten years of a freeze on any chance of career promotion, and removal of pension rights. Will the Commissioner say this afternoon whether she thinks they are right in concluding that the acquired rights directive – which they thought would give them protection – has been a totally worthless piece of European legislation?

Political group: PPE-DE