GwendalTsang/DEFT09-parquet huggingface dataset:
Mr President, we agree with the objectives pursued in the Commission’s proposal on the new regulation on flax and hemp: to regulate and balance the markets, simplify the common agricultural policy and prevent fraud. However, we do not agree with the chosen method. This is because we consider that this proposal, since the amendments improving it, which were presented by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, have not been accepted, may lead to the total disappearance of hemp and flax crops in small- and medium-sized holdings, and as an alternative crop in certain areas of the Union. We believe, Commissioner, that it is unacceptable that, in order to put an end to fraud, we should seek to end cultivation within a certain sector. This is a good time to point out that the best way to combat fraud is through the total transparency of public aid and of the investigations into fraud that are under way, and publishing the names of fraudsters, as the only way of preventing all farmers and the whole of the sector from having to pay for the consequences of fraud on the part of a few speculators. The inclusion of flax and hemp within the general regulations on herbaceous plants requires the establishment of a single yield for all areas of the European Union. The existence of different yields in northern and southern areas, in the different regions of the Union, may lead to real discrimination in payments per surface area with regard to this crop. Therefore, we request that the inclusion of an average yield be accepted for all regions of the Union, and that this be the average yield for cereals. With regard to aid for processing, we feel that it is completely inappropriate that there should be transitional aid for the processing of short-fibre flax, as the Commission proposes, which would end in 2006. We believe that it should be long-term aid and that it should be brought into line with the aid for the processing of long-fibre flax, which is the only way of guaranteeing the commercial production of short-fibre flax in an industrial sector which provides a genuine alternative to synthetic products. Commissioner, we are in complete agreement on the need for stabilisers with regard to this crop, but we completely disagree with the national guaranteed quantities established in the Commission’s proposal, since we feel that they are absolutely inadequate and represent quite the opposite of the actual situation in each of the countries. We therefore also ask you to consider the proposal presented by the Committee on Agriculture. Lastly, we absolutely agree with the existence of controls in this sector. Therefore, the existence, in every single case, of the sales contract between the farmer and the processor, seems to us to be essential. We are therefore voting against the report with regard to the disappearance of these contracts. The existence of a contract is the best way of proving that the crop has been sold and processed.

Political group: PSE
The Minister will be aware that the Court of Justice is already deploying the Charter quite broadly in its jurisprudence. My worry is that we face a situation where the Commission, Parliament and the Court think of the Charter as binding but the Council does not, creating a situation that can only result in political and legal confusion. Will he promise that the Council will at least keep the impact of the Charter closely under scrutiny and review its status on a continuing basis?

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, the Lehne report on money laundering. First of all, I would like to congratulate Mr Lehne and the entire group for the work they have done. The document is very sound and strikes a fine balance. The Green Group as well as the regionalists have voted in favour of this report because it is an instrument for fighting laundering practices, and fighting money laundering is the best way to tackle organised crime. The 1991 directive confined itself to examining money laundering practices with regard to drugs money. But organised crime embraces a great deal more. Hopefully, the proposals submitted by the rapporteur will open up the possibility of adopting a forceful approach in the fight against organised crime, such as trafficking in people and smuggling, but also fraud and corruption in the art trade. It is important that the exchange of information should be compulsory and we also set great store by the fact that a standard set of rules will be imposed on Member States and candidate countries in the fight against money laundering, thus guaranteeing minimum measures. The rapporteur also states, by way of justification, that the new directive provides for the possibility of requiring proof of identity from estate agents, notaries, external accountants and legal consultants, unless they represent their clients in legal proceedings or provide legal advice. This report can be used as a basis for further action. Our Group welcomes it with open arms, and I do not think that organised crime will receive this report with too much enthusiasm.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, I have campaigned long and hard for the establishment of a European coastguard, and in the light of numerous maritime accidents and incidents that have occurred in recent years, the case for such a maritime force has never been stronger. Last year I produced a detailed policy proposal calling for the establishment of an EU coastguard, which I submitted to the European Convention for discussion. Since the Prestige disaster in November 2002, the issues of European maritime security and safety have been given a much higher priority on the European agenda. The enduring environmental damage caused by the Prestige disaster demonstrates that Member States acting alone are under-resourced and ill-prepared to face such disasters. In addition, the traffic in EU shipping lanes is increasingly heavy and the number of collisions and disasters that have occurred in EU waters points to the need for more effective coordination in avoiding potential maritime disasters. Regrettably, our coastal waters are being exploited by organised crime for trafficking in arms, drugs, cigarettes and human beings. Additionally, given the present geo-political climate, we must consider how we can prevent the potential threat of terrorist attacks using the seas of Europe. Often EU leaders seek to make the EU more relevant in the daily lives of their citizens. Establishing an EU coastguard would be a tangible way of doing this because it would tackle the real concerns of those we represent. I therefore welcome the Sterckx report. I welcome the fact that it has adopted my proposal for the establishment of an EU coastguard as the best means of improving safety at sea in the long term, and in addition has called for a clear decision-making and command structure for dealing with maritime emergencies. I congratulate Mr Sterckx for producing an excellent report and I would urge Members of this House to support it enthusiastically.

Political group: PPE-DE
Firstly, I should like to congratulate the rapporteur for the work that he and his staff did in producing what was a good report until we had that regrettable vote in committee which has unfortunately now produced a report which I personally cannot support. This debate on that report comes at a very opportune moment after American research companies announced that they had successfully cloned human embryos. It is quite clear that if we accept this report we will fall behind the rest of the world in the development of very important treatments for cancer, diabetes, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease. This debate does not impose any legal requirements upon Member States but if the messages we send out today are heard strongly across Europe, they will have serious implications for vital areas of medical research in the future. These proposals are restrictive and extreme. They do not reflect a sensible and balanced approach. If you look around Member States, for example the United Kingdom, we can see that a genuine lead has been taken to recognise the undoubted potential benefits of these technologies but also that there is the need for controls and proper licensing arrangements which reflect the very real ethical concerns. We should not, in my view, adopt these proposals as they stand because they are unrealistic, potentially damaging and will seriously harm medical research across the whole of the European Union. The announcement in the United States this week has quite clearly demonstrated the speed at which research is now moving and the need to move technology and regulation on at the same pace. If these proposals become EU policy we will see the clock being turned back rather than being speeded up to keep pace with important technological developments.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I would first of all like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Souchet, on his report, because there was only one possible response to the Commission proposal, which was not a good proposal, and that was a powerful parliamentary response, which is what we have. I am extremely pleased with it. It is also providing us with the opportunity to examine the situation we currently find ourselves in, as we are being forced to adapt regulations on two counts, which means that we sometimes need to adopt working methods which are not our own. The first point is agreements reached at WTO level and the second one could be the budget. I would like briefly to explain both, starting with the WTO rules. It is becoming clear – poignantly so – given the price level in the EU but also outside, that we still need refunds, and there is also an indication that the difference in power between producers and farmers worldwide and those who sell their products is still far too pronounced. As long as this is the case, we cannot in fact do without refunds. This will also need to be spelled out clearly during the forthcoming WTO negotiations. The second point concerns the budget. It does not seem right to me to use this in the argument regarding the refund regulation and processed agricultural products. Why? Because the European Union has, for a number of years, awarded refunds to Member States because it simply was unable spend it all itself. Surely, this cannot be the argument. Secondly, Parliament made it abundantly clear in its report on the 2001 budget, which was adopted in the Agricultural Committee, that there is extra scope within the framework of the financial agreements of Berlin. In these agreements, a number of proposals have been made for a number of export certificates in order to solve this problem. For example, an extra five million has been proposed for cereals in the form of spirits, an extra ten million for cereals and rice, eleven million for sugar and isoglucose and eleven million for processed dairy produce. So the money is available and the solution should thus be in sight. The fact remains that the agricultural policy is, in principle, there for the benefit of farmers. This is why it has been framed with the European rural areas in mind. The fact that this regulation is necessary also illustrates the close relationship between the processing industries in Europe and the farmers. In this sense, an interim regulation is essential. But I should add that, quite clearly, we should drive home the message to the processing industry that, first and foremost, we rely on products which are grown within the European Union. In addition, I should also call on the Commission to give due consideration to small- and medium-sized businesses. In many heavily agricultural regions, jobs are already thin on the ground, so it is precisely those companies that should be able to cope with this type of regulation and should, in that sense, be given more attention.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, I have Mr Nicholson's problem in an even more acute form. I turned up for my debate on ASEM III at the time indicated to find that the whole debate had taken place. I do not know what the problem is. I think it is that one or two Members are absent which then brings the debate forward which means that more and more people arrive after the debate. I do not know how we can solve this problem but my apologies to the House for not being present when I should have been. I do not know how we can tackle this problem in the future.

Political group: PSE
Well, that really takes the biscuit! That is probably one of the most ridiculously evasive answers I have heard in a very long time. Mr Kinnock says that we would have known what the letter contained if we had been able to study it. Marvellous, if we only get to see it after the debate! I applied to Mr Kinnock’s office so as to be able to study the letter before the debate, but I was told that I could possibly get to examine it after the debate. That only goes to show that Mr Kinnock has not understood in the slightest what openness really means. Mr Kinnock appears not to have learned anything from the scandal involving the Commission to which he previously belonged – the Santer Commission, which fell because it did not understand the link between transparency, on the one hand, and corruption and fraud, on the other. If Mr Kinnock had learned anything from the Commission to which he then belonged, he would have understood. I refer to the type of threatening letter which he obviously wrote and which Mrs Gradin understood as such, to judge from the statements she made to the Swedish press. Mrs Gradin must surely have read the letter before she made her statement. In the same way, Mr Asp must surely have read the letter before he made his statement. They no doubt knew, in any case, what the letter contained, and they obviously perceived it as a threat. It does in fact dishonour Parliament and is an insult to this House to turn tail and evade responsibility, as Mr Kinnock is now doing.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, like many others in the Group of the , I have voted against this report for many reasons, but above all for three reasons. First of all, it is not, as many perhaps believe, federalism which is now a salient feature of Parliament’s attitude but, rather, centralism. It is the big States which are obtaining more power, those and the central institutions. There is no trace of decentralisation and the redistribution of power and no sign of any substance being given to the subsidiarity principle. Secondly, no adjustments are being made in anticipation of enlargement, which is perhaps the most serious feature of all. If a Union of 28 Member States is to be successful, it must obviously have a flexible structure. There must be clear definitions of powers in regard to what is to be decided centrally, what is to be decided in the Member States and what can be decided at regional level. There is nothing of this, however. If such a large Union is to be a real success, a large proportion of the decisions now made centrally must clearly be decentralised to a lower level. Otherwise, the whole system will implode. Thirdly, this is no democratic, constitutional process but a case of a power game behind locked doors. I have therefore voted against.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is with great relief that we welcomed the proposed Council decision on the creation of a European Refugee Fund. After Kosovo, Chechnya, Afghanistan, to cite but a few of the tragedies which bathe our planet in blood, creating such a body is an increasingly urgent matter. The report shows the extent to which parliamentary activity can be beneficial to Europe. We therefore support these motions. We shall here mention only three points. Firstly, if there is one point on which the report is not satisfactory, it is financial resources. Very few resources are allocated to the Fund, considering the scale of its activities – improving reception conditions, integrating persons benefiting from international protection, encouraging voluntary return by facilitating reintegration in the country of origin. These are huge tasks requiring amounts far greater than those initially planned. We must provide ourselves with the resources to realise our shared ambitions, and make Europe a land of solidarity and hospitality, which respects human dignity and the values which are the reasons for thousands of people to seek asylum, particularly freedom of democratic expression and peace. Secondly, improving reception conditions should also include providing access to health care for all, the provision of education for children, and also training. Already made rootless by virtue of their exile, families must be able to benefit from education for their children and training programmes for young people in order to regain some stability, to promote their social and economic integration, and to encourage their possible return to their own country. Thirdly, many of us are calling for NGOs and the associations working on a day-to-day basis with refugees to be consulted, both in defining the necessary programmes and in their implementation. It would be a serious mistake to exclude the very women and men who often, with their invaluable experience, make good the omissions of the State, from the process. Finally, in conclusion, I should like once again to stress the ever more insistent need for Member States to arrive quickly at common legislation in matters of asylum. It is only this advance which will make it possible to allow this European Fund to make a proper impact.

Political group: Verts-ALE
Mr President, congratulations to the Commissioner for a very bold and courageous proposal. Indeed, you should rest assured that many in this House support you in this move even if some would perhaps suggest quite the opposite. Car manufacturers will not change their behaviour. They are doing too well to want to do that and we have waited the best part of decade for them to do so since the last review. Will we have to wait another decade for them to come back to this House to say the same things time and time again? And, in the meantime, consumers across the European Union will have to pay, as they have always done, and as they will continue to do unless we tackle the issue of the cartel. It is very clear from your proposals, Commissioner, that you want to do just that and you have the support of the Labour delegation in this group and other delegations across this room. I hope that the support which you have received here will give you the courage to continue in this bold move and that we will finally see some reduction in the activity of this cartel and some improvement for the consumer across the European Union.

Political group: PSE
Mr President, I am going to raise a few points, but my main point is on smoking, again. I have raised it several times with the President before and also with the Quaestors. I have been asked to write in but I thought it would be worth raising it here as well. As an asthmatic who has grave problems when I come into contact with a cigarette at all, I am finding it extremely difficult to move around this building. It has got a little better since the last time we were here. At least in the corridors people are not smoking. But I cannot get in and out of the hemicycle without encountering cigarettes. So I cannot do my work properly. I have to cover my face with paper towels and run through to my office. I had serious asthma attacks here. I cannot carry on with the smoking in this building. I should be grateful if you could actually do something about it so that at least outside the hemicycle I and other people like me do not have to encounter smoke. In the restaurants there is supposed to be a no-smoking area. It is not observed and also the no-smoking area is through the smoking area in all the restaurants. So if I want to get food I have to queue up in the smoking area or someone has to bring it to my office for me. I would also like to see exit signs in case of emergency. When the bell went off yesterday several of us did not even know where the stairs were.

Political group: ELDR
Mr President, I am really pleased that this report incorporates the proposal by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development that it must in future be possible to completely exempt from consumer taxes biofuels and petrol manufactured from biological materials. However, it really breaks my heart that this is to be possible only up to 2010. However, I hope that it will be possible to introduce such a tax exemption after this period, as the manufacturers need a degree of certainty in order to be able to make the necessary investments. Biodiesel represents an important contribution to attaining the Kyoto target and gives us independence from fossil sources of energy. I want, finally, to emphasise that the production of renewable raw materials will secure existing and new jobs in rural areas, including in the run-up to enlargement.

Political group: PPE-DE
Mr President, it was an historic event when, in July 1998 at a conference in Rome, it was possible to adopt the treaty to establish the international criminal court. It was a treaty which would make it possible for an independent court to judge people who had committed war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. Unfortunately, we know that there is a great need for such a criminal court. Ninety States signed the Rome treaty, but so far only six countries have ratified it. That is precisely the problem. If we are to progress further and if the Court is really to be able to begin its work, then at least sixty countries must ratify the treaty and hand this over to the UN. We must all work towards the goal of obtaining a functioning court within a few years. My group urges the Council and the Commission to do their utmost, politically and diplomatically, to bring this about. At the same time, one ought not to forget the applicant countries which I believe require a lot of support if they are to be able to be involved in this. Paragraph 5 of the resolution is, furthermore, a very important paragraph indeed when it says that the developing countries must be given economic aid if it is to be possible for them to be involved in the process of establishing a criminal court.

Political group: Verts-ALE