kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we want binding instruments at the global level because we have seen what happens to guiding principles we have seen what has happened to the environment in ecuador we have seen what happens to workers in bangladesh we have seen how global companies still operate on the basis of corruption in many parts of the world and we are not prepared to tolerate it.
we want to ensure that we have a system in place at the global level where we can protect workers the environment and consumers against the power of transnational corporations.
it trips off the tongue easily doesn't it when we say that europe is a europe of values.
well if we're a europe of values in geneva we should be leading the way not being dragged as we were slowly into this negotiation but leading the way.
i welcome where the commission has now got itself to but we should have been there before.
i understand the problems we have with some of the member states but we should also acknowledge that some member states are starting to unilaterally lead the way.
the fact that france now has a corporate duty of vigilance law the netherlands has the child labour due diligence law and even the uk with its modern slavery act all show that countries are slowly coming round to the right way of thinking on this issue.
making progress on our trade deals. theeu japan fta includes for the first time a chapter on corporate governance. in relation to investment while i have supported investment protection for industry i equally think it's time for us to ensure that investors meet their legitimate obligation to protect the folk that they meant to serve as institutions.
the use of violence for political reasons to forbid others to express their ideas is unjustifiable in our open democratic societies.
evidence from different sources such as the eu agency for fundamental rights and the council of europe confirms an alarming increase in intolerance and hatred in europe.
at eu level the council attaches great importance to ensuring the effective transposition and implementation of the framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia and other relevant hate crime laws at national level.
the council constantly calls upon member states to develop effective methods to report and ensure proper recording of hate crimes.
at national level it is for law enforcement authorities and the national courts to protect fundamental rights when these are attacked by political extremists. let me also underline the important role of education and youth work. in my capacity as a youth minister i want to stress the need to develop democratic resilience
media literacy tolerance critical thinking and conflict resolution skills in learning processes.
i would like to conclude by stressing how important it is to prevent our societies from becoming dominated by hatred.
we need to acknowledge progress also by a number of european companies to implement these principles and expect others to follow.
however in my opinion and i think it is the opinion of most of us there is no excuse for any kind of violence and the presidency and the council as a whole rejects any form of politically motivated violence and intolerance no matter where it comes from.
we have a legal framework in place that needs to be effectively implemented in practice.
we need to support it with targeted measures such as education public debate and counternarratives to prevent and tackle intolerance.
thank you commissioner. we are all looking forward to the vote tomorrow.
on migration.
migration will be one of the most crucial topics in the next european elections and we need to prove to the european citizens that more europe means more security and prosperity.
we expect member states to act forcefully against crimes committed by neonazi groups whether in the streets in football arenas or in the targeting of places of worship or asylum shelters.
however we also have to look at where this violence comes from.
societal polarisation has increased not least in the social media.
we read and talk to the like minded and this increases the polarisation of our societies.
as a society we need to step up action against racism intolerance and the toxic narratives which are shrinking the space for well informed and democratic discussion in the public sphere and are polarising our societies.
we have our charter of fundamental rights and we have to make clear that its basic principles really matter that they are not negotiable. but we have to ensure that people in europe can also relate to them. these principles should become an anchor in the fast changing and sometimes confusing world.
for me i understand the key principles as follows equality before the law;
freedom of speech but with limits to exclude for instance speech calling for violence;
freedom of religion within the limits of the legal order;
and access to justice for all not only the privileged or the rich.
and finally among the main principles i want to mention the right of feeling secure of feeling safe but not at the expense of the safety of others.
these principles can only work if they are applied and visible in people's everyday lives.
the commission is leading the work on countering the increasingly worrying phenomenon of illegal online hate speech.
we are working intensively with member states to step up the implementation of eu law to combat racism and xenophobia and to ensure that prompt investigation prosecution and proportionate sanctioning become a reality in the eu member states.
the intent is to be practical and we are striving to make a difference on the ground. our work with member states includes the compilation of promising practices and guiding principles on key issues such as hate crime training and hate crime victim support. we will also present a comprehensive guidance document on the practical application of the framework
decision on combating racism.
i consider these issues very important because they also send strong signals that hate crime and illegal hate speech are not tolerated and will be penalised.
we too as individual politicians have a role to play in avoiding divisive attitudes and in sticking to the norms.
this is the moment to stand up for the principles of our charter. and the independent media also have their role to play here it is their responsibility to counter discourse that sows division spreads disinformation and encourages exclusion.
the media are also instrumental in holding politicians to account and in defining the limits of what is acceptable and what is unacceptable in society.
mr president it's self evident that the eu must take the lead in responsible business conduct globally but in order to be able to do so it must implement at home and that's why i need to emphasise the implementation at eu level of the universally agreed un guiding principles on business and human rights. where is our action?
it's much too late now.
we have to undertake to establish binding due diligence for companies operating in europe.
we must make sure that the victims of european companies acting abroad will get access to justice and this is work that is long overdue.
so please commission please external action service please let's finally do that because that's the only way we can be a global leader and take an active role in geneva.
there is no time to waste because there's nothing more compelling in the political world today than the requirement on responsible business conduct.
people playing to the gallery people playing to their audiences back home without taking the issues seriously.
we have peace we want that to continue and that has to be guaranteed.
it has been guaranteed up until now and it will have to be into the future in the withdrawal agreement. statements like comparing the european union to soviet russia are so wide of the mark and so disrespectful as to be risible and probably maybe best ignored. they are coming from people who have no interest really in trying to get an agreement.
you speak about changes being made to the automotive sector and state control and provision to ensure this happens. in your vision of the future do you see a situation where the countries outside of the eu that may not apply the same rigorous policies as yourself to the climate are still using petrol and diesel and so on will eu manufacturers have a loophole where they can manufacture to export to them or will your state control of this clamp down on those exports?
of course any kind of violence should be condemned but it seems to me that islamic and leftwing radicalism are much more relevant problems in today's europe including when we talk about antijewish violence.
it is very unfortunate that whenever ordinary people express their concern over immigrant or islamic violence they are immediately labelled fascists racists and nazis.
many nationalist politicians and parties are systematically terrorised by the extreme left in many european countries.
i find it worrying how little attention and condemnation this phenomenon gets in the public debate.
i'd like to offer my apology on behalf of the many british people who respect the brave struggle for freedom fought by our friends in central europe and the baltic states.
for many countries the eu has supported their path away from authoritarianism and towards prosperity.
our current cooperation in peace democracy and human rights celebrates that achievement.
coming from a country that has always prided itself on diplomatic prowess for me the speech was part of an unfolding national tragedy.
this is where the ignorance of brexit has led us.
insulting our friends misrepresenting our history indulging our fantasies of a return to the colonial past. but the brexiteers are running out of steam.
in an equally lacklustre speech yesterday dominic raab claimed that democracy is sacrosanct.
so i'm waiting for him to join me in calling for a criminal inquiry into vote leave' of which he was a board member and into russian interference in the brexit campaign.
true democracy cannot be based on deceit and an empty prospectus;
it requires that british people make a choice on the deal as negotiated so that they can decide whether this is the brexit they voted for.
what's clear is that none of the tories have any real concern about ireland other than using us to score points in their internal party battle.
none of them shows any commitment to previous agreements.
they are so clueless that one thinks he can build a bridge between the islands literally over a one million tonne unstable weapons dump and another thinks he can currently spend sterling in dublin.
so some selectively interpret the good friday agreement to try to get privileged access to eu markets without having to follow any of the rules while others would happily tear up that agreement along with the commitments they have already made in the brexit negotiation.
and mr farage says the border was not an issue during the referendum. well he's dead right it wasn't because that just shows you the level of brexiteer ignorance that there was during the referendum of the history of ireland.
so the dublin government and the eu must hold firm and insist that the rights of people in ireland are not up for negotiation and that ireland will not be collateral damage.
european leadership also in making sure eubased companies respect human rights no matter where they do business is important.
we have many examples to illustrate that.
the exports of digital surveillance systems to dictatorships slavery in the garment and conflict minerals industry and north korean forced labourers working here in europe.
but too often accountability lacks and if that's true for europe imagine the disregard for human rights in the rest of the world.
so while we need to do what we can and show leadership it is an illusion to imagine europe policing the rest of the world.
governments in third countries need to be brought on board with ambitious human rights agendas and their companies should take responsibility too.
i'm very interested to hear more about what our european position towards the un efforts on a binding instrument should look like knowing that bringing any topic to the un can also lead to a watering down or a hijacking of our wellintentioned high standards.
participation in the democratic life of the eu and the electoral rights of eu citizens living abroad in another member state in the union is frequently the subject of petitions to my committee.
six member states namely cyprus denmark germany ireland malta and the united kingdom systematically deprive their nationals of the right to vote in national elections due to their residence in another member state. the same member states also disenfranchise their nationals in european elections if they live permanently in a third country.
therefore depriving citizens of the right to vote once they move to another eu member state is effectively equivalent to punishing these citizens for having exercised their right to free movement in the union.
these practices can change their whole lives without giving them the opportunity to participate which was the case for all the british citizens who were not allowed to participate in the referendum about brexit because they had lived in another member state for some time.
however they were directly affected by the result when brexit was a fact.
it is therefore high time that the member states in this union address this very concrete concern because disenfranchisement has huge consequences for all the individuals concerned.
the loss of electoral rights for citizens moving to another member state can be seen as an infringement upon freedom of movement under eu law. it could potentially stop eu citizens from exercising their right to free movement in the union.
indeed the discouraging effect in each individual case may be difficult to prove but the violation of eu citizenship rights does not require statistical or other evidence.
it's enough to read the petitions to our committee.
the main justification for disenfranchisement that citizens living abroad no longer have sufficient links with their home country seems completely outdated in the globalised world of today.
we are interconnected with each other.
the nationality bond with a state is still the main connecting factor for the rights and obligations of each citizen but citizens resident abroad still have obligations deriving from their nationality so they should also be conferred their corresponding rights.
in addition there has been a eurobarometer on electoral rights where twothirds of the respondents thought that it was not at all justified that people lose the right to vote in national elections in their country simply because they reside in another eu country. the committee on petitions considers that eu citizens who move
to reside in another member state should have the possibility to exercise their right to vote in the national elections of their country of origin.
the committee therefore calls on those member states that disenfranchise nationals who choose to live for an extended period in another member state to ease the conditions for these nationals and preserve their right to vote in national elections.
the committee is aware of the fact that the decision on who is conferred the right to vote in national and european elections lies with the member states.
nevertheless we also know that the problem of the disenfranchisement of voting rights has been known for a long time.
it is therefore high time to take action now.
we therefore urge the commission to propose specific measures for removing any obstacles to free movement.
especially in view of the upcoming elections in may next year we must safeguard the right of all eu citizens to choose to vote either in their member state of origin or in the host member state where they reside.
recently the un special envoy for yemen stated his concern about the possibility of an imminent famine.
this extremely worrying situation must be urgently addressed by the european union and the member states.
france and my country the uk have consistently been called out in this chamber for their arms sales to the saudi led coalition.
they must be held accountable for their contribution to the us extra judicial killings programme through the sharing of intelligence.
the eu must continue to link up efforts with the united nations and support a political solution achieved through multilateral diplomacy with all parties involved sitting around the table.
in the meantime the eu must also put all its efforts into finding temporary humanitarian solutions for the people who are suffering on the ground from a war they did not choose.
we've learned that the brexit referendum was fought on the basis of cheating criminality manipulation and psychological operations.
the goalposts have definitely moved because we now know that the people are waking up to the fact that they were lied to the fact that this cannot be sorted out in an afternoon that we haven't got trade deals that we're heading for a calamity.
we have to accept that taxation is required in order to run a state and we have to have a minimum of taxation because that is the best way to get people to work for their money and for business to thrive.
but if you wish to get the best out of businesses give them a competitive environment instead of harmonising across the eu with one rate of tax. why not have localised tax where different people have different sales taxes and people can compete to see which environment is best for business which one entices people to set up companies and what do the people in the area want jobs or control and regulation?
the whole concept of harmonising taxes across the eu is entirely against business against competition totally undemocratic and totally against the nation state and all its values.
mr president putting in place binding rules that oblige companies to respect human rights is urgent.
in many countries around the world transnational corporations take advantage of the soft legal framework that applies to their activities so as to favour their interests over human rights.
the land rights of indigenous people in particular are continuously violated and our own european companies are among the worst when it comes to human rights records in foreign countries.
i am saddened to see how difficult it is to reconcile the business world and human rights.
it's urgent that we revise our business models and build a fairer and more inclusive paradigm for instance through the development of social enterprises.
businesses should work for the common good for the many and not for the interests of the few.
i urge the european union and the member states to ensure the process for a binding treaty on business and human rights is kept alive and to genuinely fight for the primacy of rights over private interests.
the belfast agreement also often referred to as the good friday agreement states it is hereby declared that northern ireland in its entirety remains part of the united kingdom and shall not cease to be so without consent of a majority of the people of northern ireland'.
let me make it very clear to this house and i have heard comments here this morning that i wished i would not have heard the people of northern ireland from all backgrounds from all persuasions do not want to ever ever return to their past history.
there has to be a solution found that ensures that that never happens in the future.
i'm sorry i am from northern ireland and i say it is the united kingdom and it is northern ireland that must be first.
however that happens it's going to be difficult but it's going to have to work out.
for that to work out we don't need meps like you coming in here i'm no fan of ms may no fan of the conservative party but it doesn't help you coming in here and questioning whether their prime minister is legitimate or not.
mr president commissioner i could not support your words more today.
our intentions and actions must be to support international efforts for peace.
the world's worst humanitarian crisis according to the united nations yemen is a theatre of conflict where almost every immediate neighbour has found itself drawn in due to remote interests sowing discord and destabilising not just yemen itself but the entire neighbourhood.
all the time remotely supported and directed. the propaganda machine seeks to distort and detract so that the world is misinformed.
within that vacuum grows extremism.
the ultimate agenda of which is to cause chaos.
that should not be our agenda and neither should we allow anybody to misrepresent our position.
trade agreements are not there to signal virtue backed up by economic threats.
it was dragged out by the eu's attempt to impose conditions that had little or nothing to do with trade.
and in passing i have to say fortunately the topic of the athabasca oil sands was glossed over otherwise the eu would still be negotiating today and we'd be into eight years of negotiations.
it's bad enough when the eu tries on this tactic with rich countries but these tactics are especially damaging when used against poor countries and we've seen this with sri lanka a country that had suffered civil war followed by a tsunami.
nevertheless sri lanka had its trade preferences removed entirely for political reasons. human rights is one thing extraterritoriality and the politicisation of trade is quite another.
the state is simply handcuffed and cannot do anything'.
on sunday seven people were killed through intra houthi fighting.
we must engage honestly with local political leaders respecting their concerns. peace can only be built up from the base of local society in yemen and we should not prejudge political outcomes before genuine discussion. finally the yemeni rial is at an all time low. demonstrations are planned throughout the country as ordinary people rise up against this further disaster.
you seem really outraged about a lot of things.
do you not understand that maybe the heads of government are reticent about taking on these noble ideas you have because actually they have to be elected by the people in their countries and these opinion polls you speak about are not relevant to those heads of government?
mr president as we approach the october council let me once again make some things clear to both mr barnier and the member states who continue to use northern ireland and the impossible demands of the backstop as a sword hanging over the outcome of the negotiations.
the idea as proposed in the backstop that we would allow northern ireland to become some sort of semi detached part of the united kingdom is both offensive and outrageous.
protecting the constitutional and economic integrity of the united kingdom is a red line that cannot be broken or bent.
i say to the eu as well as my own government that when it comes to the stability of the united kingdom and the security of northern ireland's place in it mark my words we are not bluffing.
the irish sea checks proposed by mr barnier would put in place customs and regulatory differences within the united kingdom cutting our province adrift and creating a border within the united kingdom from day one.
mr juncker you may only be concerned about the irish republic and the dublin government with your ireland first' comment but i am concerned about the jobs and prosperity of families in northern ireland whose economy is structurally linked to the rest of the united kingdom.
the sooner brussels realises this the sooner we can get to a place where a sensible trade negotiation as possible.
i believe europe has been compromised because of the arms sales to saudi arabia including by the uk's tory government and it risks being complicit in possible war crimes in yemen.
i believe we really have to stand up in a meaningful way and stop selling arms to saudi arabia.
along with other colleagues i deeply regret that the geneva consultations had to be abandoned last saturday so i have some questions for the commissioner.
secondly what are the outcomes of the political consultations on regional issues with iran on yemen?
and thirdly any peace deal focusing on the north and not the east and the south will not succeed in the long term in finding a political solution.
the inclusion of measurable criteria for legibility;