kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
with this framework we can promote sustainable investment and tackle some of the root causes of migration in africa and the neighbourhood.
it provides guarantees in order to stimulate private sector involvement in the socio economic development of the partner countries.
i think this is the right approach in the long term.
we need to match our development and investment expertise to enable the eu and the private sector to cooperate. we need an instrument which will operate in high risk situations where investment would not be possible without our guarantees.
this opens new challenges to boost investments and improve the business climate in the most fragile countries.
in order to do this we need to stimulate investment in such areas as socio economic infrastructure smes or microfinance.
once again i am glad that we are ready to make this fund a reality.
it will be a vital instrument to stimulate development in our partner countries and an important tool in our external policies.
mr president honourable members thank you for these encouraging words and the support of the european parliament in this file. let me emphasise that the commission will really regularly report to parliament about the implementation of the plan.
the commission will take its responsibilities and ensure that the regulation is respected in all its aspects such as ensuring additionality poverty alleviation more and better and decent jobs for young people and for women policy coherence for development and value for money.
let me conclude by underlining that i am very much looking forward to fruitful cooperation under this instrument.
now the real work starts with the implementation of the regulation setting up the secretariat preparing and defining the investments windows.
thank you very much for the attention and your cooperation.
it is incorrectly worded and inconsistent with the text which was actually tabled in the joint resolution by my group and others. i do not know whether you have been informed of this and whether you can take it into account but the text in paragraph two should read respecting the individual wishes of anyone living in camp ashraf as regards to their future';
that is not what is actually published and that is what should be in the text.
it is a very serious allegation.
a member has made a very serious allegation about voting in the chamber.
this means that those who are benefiting from overclaiming vat will continue to do so while those who do not overclaim vat will be at a hugely significant competitive disadvantage both in the poultry sector and in other sectors beef lamb pigs etc.
in fact i personally know a whistleblower who has lost his livelihood through exposing a scheme where there is significant overclaiming of vat under the eu flatrate vat scheme in ireland. we know that this has been happening in the poultry sector or part of it for over ten years and of course a relevant question now is whether there is any similar scheme in other sectors.
i believe there is a golden circle in certain agricultural sectors where some overclaim flatrate vat to the detriment of other farmers and processors who are outside that circle.
on foot of a complaint made by the whistleblower and myself to the commission ireland has amended its legislation to allow the minister for finance to stop this practice. however it is quite clear that there is significant foot dragging in dealing with this issue.
my work to fight tax avoidance by the rich and powerful would be impossible without information released by brave whistleblowers like antoine deltour and herv falciani.
as greens we also reject the eu trade secrets directive which protected the secrecy of some of the world's largest companies right across the continent.
frightened by the potential of digital information the uk government's legal advisers are proposing to increase prison sentences for revealing state secrets perhaps up to fourteen years and seeking to intimidate journalists who report this information.
today parliament expresses our solidarity with all whistleblowers and our impatience for an eu wide law to protect all those who share information in the public interest.
we want them to reveal information of public importance about corruption or illegal activity by the state or private corporations.
these are worrying signs that the uk's decision to leave the eu is unleashing dark forces of state control and secrecy.
in conclusion a few days ago the president of the european council mr van rompuy stated that europeans are not innovative because they are depressed.
mr president i would like to thank ms merkies for all her efforts and her coordination during the period in which this report was being negotiated among the political groups.
we also need productive cooperation between the various stakeholders.
we will encourage and support better collaboration between business and academia through the creation of knowledge alliances to develop new curricula that address innovation skills gaps.
last but not least ms merkies mentioned social innovation which has been discussed by itre. the commission is committed to launching a european social innovation pilot that will provide expertise and a networked virtual hub for social entrepreneurs and for the public and third sectors.
parliament's president has been invited to nominate four members to the steering board and we look forward to that.
so we encourage member states and regions to set aside budgets for public procurement of innovative products and services.
well innovation union will make the best use of public money.
innovation union will also champion the best examples of public sector innovation and the private and public sectors can learn from each other's best practice.
investment in education research and innovation has the potential to create more wealth and jobs than it costs and investment in innovation will help us tackle the great challenges that society faces.
on thirteen april two thousand and eleven we presented two legislative proposals on ipr under enhanced cooperation which will reduce the cost of patents by up to. eighty a single european patent will be valid in twenty five member states and if you want to build a start up or you need access to finance the commission will ensure by two thousand and twelve that venture capital funds established in any member state can function and invest freely
for our small and medium sized enterprises and entrepreneurs innovation union is working to create conditions on intellectual property rights standard setting and access to finance that will be much more conducive to innovation.
finally what about the average taxpayer?
this means prioritising smart fiscal consolidation despite severe budget constraints.
public procurement represents seventeen of the eu's gdp an enormous potential market for innovation.
that brings me to the partnerships which will provide a framework for aligning instruments and resources bringing all the key actors together.
for europe's researchers we will take measures to boost cross border cooperation and remove obstacles to research and mobility completing the european research area by.
innovation has been placed at the heart of the europe two thousand and twenty strategy for smart sustainable and inclusive growth. i would like to take this opportunity to illustrate in concrete terms what innovation union will mean for different people.
i think everybody here agrees that we need to improve the conditions for innovation.
that is what innovation union is all about. it is about taking the very basic blue sky research that we do so well in the european union and translating it all the way to the marketplace so that we provide the jobs here and they are not provided abroad.
all the regions of europe should play to their strengths.
of course for a successful implementation of ideas governance matters very strongly and a governance framework for innovation must be based today on pragmatism and must be delivered with a sense of urgency and also must be at the service of the policy content.
every link in the european innovation chain must be strengthened and innovation policy must be focused towards challenges.
that is what i understand the innovation union is offering.
today we run the risk that not only companies but also governments might decrease investment in innovation.
in europe innovation is not just a concept that can be limited to specific innovation centres.
it needs to be applied across the entire european territory.
governance for innovation should therefore do more than just support research and development policy.
governance for innovation must mean establishing new partnerships enabling efficient innovation systems that mobilise intellectual and entrepreneurial capacities detecting also sleeping innovators of which we have many in europe through a business environment that is conducive to innovation and particularly for smes
covering all sectors of the economy.
at the end of the day however my message is that you interfere with the workings of the free market at your peril.
and by all means help them to promote and market their products and overall encourage all players in the marketplace to form mature contractual arrangements.
mr president we have a dysfunctional market price chain.
by all means support voluntary initiatives;
more regulation mandatory powers and market intervention are not the solution nor do they reflect the interests of all the stakeholders and in particular of five hundred million consumers.
by all means encourage the supply side to organise themselves into cooperatives in order to get better presence in the market place;
i do welcome and believe there is a need for greater transparency in the industry and i think to that end codes of practice and the appointment of ombudsmen would be helpful but i urge the commissioner here to approach this problem with a light touch.
all those i welcome and i suggest they are realistic proposals which the commission can put forward.
the imbalance of power between the players in the chain has resulted too often in the supply side not receiving a fair return for their produce and so while i agree with and support the broad objectives of this report i cannot agree with the proposals and solutions which the rapporteur suggests.
there is no doubt that contractual imbalances associated with unequal bargaining power have a negative effect on competitiveness in the food supply chain particularly for the smaller actors.
in simple terms the small guys get squeezed.
finally i am pleased to hear the comments of the commissioner and i applaud his proposals.
there is in my view a case of market failure and some intervention is needed but the crucial question is to know what interventions we should make.
i support voluntary contracts rather than compulsory ones and the establishment in all member states of an eu ombudsman.
we know this from our own member states.
the food supply chain is extraordinarily complex with so many different factors impacting on how it operates.
if it does we will lose many of our primary producers and then what happens to eu food security and food sovereignty?
the food supply chain is not functioning properly and farmers are not receiving fair revenues.
we must deal with these issues in the context of the cap.
i believe it needs delicate handling so that we do not end up enforcing the law of unintended consequences. there is a problem a real problem.
indeed a recent survey in ireland revealed that seventy four of consumers believe that farmers do not receive a fair price for their produce. in ireland farmers receive approximately thirty three of the retail price of milk fifty of the retail price of beef and twenty of the retail price of cheese.
i disagree with mr fox on one point;
a very interesting point that has not featured in this discussion but is of relevance is that there is ample evidence that we are exporting our unfair trading practices to developing countries where huge eu based multinationals abuse their dominant position in the marketplace. in that context i believe we need a global response.
on a personal level i disagree with below cost selling.
the commission i believe needs to investigate and where necessary take action against anti competitive behaviour.
in the uk many less well off consumers purchase these own brands and remark that the quality is often very good.
therefore while it is very important that we should do absolutely everything to ensure the food supply we should not do anything which would damage less well off consumers and small companies.
their quest to increase market share and profits has had a negative impact on farmers and in some cases processors.
currently the market does not reward farmers for the time and money which they invest in farming to produce high quality safe sustainable food.
of course any intervention must be seen in terms of the cap.
without this the industry would struggle to survive.
we in this parliament need to realise the importance of this policy and the benefit that it provides for our farming sectors.
we have held many debates in this chamber in relation to the dairy sector in particular.
if we want our farmers to compete in a free market we must address the problems within the supply chain third country imports and the price consumers pay for food taking into account falling farm gate prices.
the role of speculators and the need to reduce volatility in the market must be addressed immediately.
import bans and scaremongering by speculators have fuelled a major hike in cereal prices across the world;
the way to do this is not to put farmers out of business or to increase regulation but to ensure fair prices both at farm gate and at consumer level.
while also recognising the valuable role that retailers' own brand labels play in enhancing competition and providing choice and lower prices to consumers.
they may not like it but markets work and the freer the market the better it works to the benefit of all especially the consumer.
i have to urge all members to vote against this resolution and to support the alternative ecr resolution.
normally own initiative reports are tame affairs and we do not get a chance to debate the issues so i suppose it is positive that we are having a debate about what is now a very controversial and sensitive subject the issue of fair prices and fair returns to farmers.
the very fact that we have this report means that there is a problem in the marketplace for food and that we do need political action to address it.
i am concerned that there is some rowing back from that position over the summer months but i certainly am not rowing back from my support for the bov report.
while i have concerns about elements of it i support the overall theme which is that we need action to address concerns of producers and to ensure that they get fair prices.
it is a simple fact that producers are price takers they do not set the price that they get for their produce.
would that they could and if they were wise perhaps they should keep food in short supply and we would all pay a dear price for that. but they are not price makers they are price takers and they need protection.
i want to respond to some comments from the ecr colleagues.
two words terrify me and they are light touch.
the idea that light touch regulation works for the food sector or for the banking sector i am afraid it does not work.
light touch regulation that is not monitored will fail so let us get away from that idea.
it is not like any other sector.
i would ask those who say that the market works because it provides the lowest possible consumer prices to answer the question how long can that pertain?
and is cheap food going to keep going in the long term?
we need action.
there are undoubtedly certain problems in europe's food supply chain.
it must be acknowledged that farmers are experiencing consistently falling farm gate prices coupled with ever increasing operational costs whilst retailers and consumers continue to enjoy handsome profits and low prices respectively.
i certainly do not believe that the answer is to introduce yet more european union legislation to enforce mandatory codes of conduct upon farmers. existing eu competition laws are adequate and should be properly enforced. the food supply chain must be allowed to operate in the context of the free market and as far as possible be free of unnecessary burdensome regulation and red tape.
greater price transparency in the food supply chain is required as is an end to unfair practices by retailers such as stocking fees and unacceptably late payments to producers.
on the other hand farmers need to be encouraged to organise themselves in a more effective manner so that they can increase their bargaining power in relation to large processors and retailers.
in my opinion the way forward is to tackle anti competitive practices and promote voluntary codes of good practice.
this volatility in the market is really destroying the market.
freedom of expression not censorship;
to conclude the european union is not just a fair weather friend.
has done much already and will continue its policy of critical engagement taking a value based approach.
thailand needs to bridge divides in society as in politics.
on the positive side the thai authorities have publicly declared that they will address it and have already taken some initial constructive steps but much still needs to be done.
movement i support the call on the thai military authorities to lift repressive restrictions on the right to liberty and the peaceful exercise of other human rights in particular those relevant to peaceful involvement in political activities.
the report highlighted abuses of migrant workers in thailand by a thai company called natural fruits.
sweeping and unchecked powers have been given to the military as has been mentioned.
the charges made against andy hall are utterly unfounded and he appears to have received this treatment simply because he had the temerity to expose labour exploitation. i call on the thai authorities to adhere to their human rights obligations and to drop all charges against mr hall.
media outlets and websites have been censored and the rights of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly have been massively restricted.
mr hall faces seven years in prison and a multi million pound fine simply for conducting research for a report by a human rights group.
two thousand and thirteen finally the eu should find out whether natural fruit is still continuing to export to the eu and should ensure that consumers have the right to know the origin of products.
andy hall contributed to a finnwatch report in two thousand and thirteen which showed that labour abuses and slaverylike practices are a reality in the activity of a thai pineapple wholesaler natural fruit.
he should be rewarded for this not threatened with seven years in prison.
human rights defenders must have the possibility to expose human rights violations.
this is something we are concerned about because if a constitution is to be future proof the process needs to be inclusive.
we have seen increasingly worrying reports of deteriorating human rights in thailand.
because of this friendship and commitment there can be only one priority for the eu with regard to thailand and that is for thailand to return as soon as possible to a democratic society with an elected civil and representative government.
we call on the thai authorities to lift all measures that restrict freedom of assembly and freedom of speech and to allow for the genuine political involvement of all citizens.
we therefore urge the thai authorities not only to stick to the presented timeline for a new constitution with elections in mid two thousand and seventeen but also to present a constitution that is based on democracy equality freedom and fundamental rights.
it needs to be transparent and people need to have the opportunity to participate.
unfortunately this joint resolution is a woeful attempt to address the reality of the current conflict.
attacks from both sides should stop.
israel's collective punishment of palestinians in the aftermath of the murder of three young israeli boys which we all deplore is not mentioned.
this parliament must show it cares and it would befit the mep who complained about us standing along with millions worldwide who are protesting to also show that he.
israel must end and we must end the impunity over such gross violations.
the arrests of hundreds of palestinians which contributed towards tension in the region are not mentioned.
israel's violation of international humanitarian law with the expansion of settlements and the construction of apartheid walls and roads are not mentioned.
israel must lift the blockade on gaza and stop the slaughter.
the causes of the conflict are ignored in this joint sham resolution.
madam president gaza is once again at crisis point. millions worldwide are protesting against the slaughter taking place there.
the eu the winner of a nobel peace prize cannot remain a silent observer any longer.
we know from the history that it is largely the palestinians who have suffered and that israel has systematically eaten away at their land breaking all international laws. both sides need to understand that there is no military solution.
madam president hundreds of angry constituents have contacted me about the killing of innocent people in gaza.
a two state solution may become redundant if we do not call for an immediate ceasefire and redouble our efforts to ensure a lasting peace.
it prides itself on championing human rights and it must therefore lead this peace effort providing the voice of sanity and hope.
we continue to pour money into the palestinian areas with little input on the political situation.
five six billion has been spent by the eu on support to the palestinians over the last twenty years and i want to know what leverage the european union has exerted over the palestinians to bring them to the conference table for that money.
we can all stand here wringing our hands and the fact is that resolutions from this parliament are not going to make any difference. probably the only area where the eu can have any influence is on the use of money and that is what i want to come back to as well because some.
the court of auditors found that there were people in gaza being paid from eu funds who were not even working!
the region is extremely unstable today and confronted with serious unrest.
it is not functioning well because peace is missing and this is why i reiterate the need for the european union to be an effective visible and consistent contributor to the peace process and not to assist the process as done by others.
ms auken this is compounded by their habit a war crime of using innocent palestinian civilians as human shields and hiding their weapons in mosques and schools. israel does everything humanly possible to minimise civilian casualties;
madam president israel is a democratic state respectful of the rule of law and of course it wants peace.
but it cannot be subject to unremitting rocket attacks on its civilian areas without defending itself and its civilian population and the right to retaliate militarily against hamas and islamic jihad is its right under international law in gaza and it is they who are responsible for this tragedy.
in contrast hamas has a total disregard for human life.
it is cruel enough that we rob our young people in spain in italy and in greece of their hope for the future as they are not provided with adequate jobs.
i stopped counting the ceasefires that just come and go.
he did not find enough allies to help him resolve the crisis.
this is untenable.
we are all very much in favour of a ceasefire of course. too much blood has already been spilled too many innocent people have died but a ceasefire is certainly not enough as we have so often witnessed in the middle east.
now just consider the situation of the youth in the west bank or in gaza living in a stateless entity that is left unable to provide for anything let alone for a decent living. on the other hand israel as we have seen in the present conflict is under a constant barrage of rocket attacks.