kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i have received many representations from farmers and public bodies in my constituency and other interested parties who are totally opposed to such a ban arguing that it would have serious negative implications for their respective industries.
had such a ban won majority support it would have led as we have heard already to an explosion of rats and mice across europe with the consequent damage to stored crops farms and domestic properties on a large scale.
sadly the environment committee did adopt one specific ban of a widely used second generation anti coagulant rodenticide.
i hope the house will vote against amendment two hundred and forty three so as to enable this effective rat poison to continue in use particularly as it has already undergone rigorous scientific assessment and has been through a proper and detailed regulatory process.
it is estimated that seven per cent of all house fires and fifty per cent of all farm fires are caused by rodents gnawing electric cables.
mr president the aim of this regulation is to protect public health and the environment.
the current regime for authorisation is too slow and bureaucratic.
we must ensure that the authorisation of new products is more efficient both in time and money.
pest control is central to the protection of human health.
i welcome the amendments that will improve the availability of some products that kill rodents but as has already been discussed a problem remains over the treatment of difenacoum.
this is an effective and widely used rodenticide. it should be classified as an authorised substance.
it is essential to the effective control of rats and mice.
its removal from annex i by the commission is simply irrational and i invite the commission to explain why this occurred.
the authorisation of products should always be based on the result of scientific assessment not by politicians seeking to grab a headline.
will you remind them of article nine when the report comes in about the cut in the minimum wage?
this has happened because irish banks and european banks engaged in reckless lending and borrowing right under the noses of the ecb. the interest rates you are now charging to ireland for borrowing according to today's newspapers are three more than were charged to latvia romania and hungary.
of course you may say that this is an internal matter for ireland but it is not.
in ireland we see the evidence of this response where the minimum wage has been cut by one euro an hour in the last week and where invalidity payments and payments to blind persons have also been cut.
if it is true please explain to me so that i can explain to irish citizens how the social clause is working for them.
the parameters for austerity in ireland were set by the eu and our government will send monthly reports to you.
what now do the phrases the fight against social exclusion' or the guarantee of adequate social protection' contained in article nine signify to those citizens?
representatives from the court of auditors say that there is no precedent for the eu charging such a margin on loans. can i ask you to confirm or deny this situation?
one of those was the social clause article. nine on several occasions in this chamber and elsewhere i have asked the commission and the council to now apply article nine in their proposals on economic governance and of course in their response to the current economic crisis which is a real test of their commitment to the social clause.
nine where was article nine when the commission was negotiating this deal with a conservative irish government on the point of collapse?
two thousand and eleven what other impact can that have than to decimate services of general interest and in particular social services of general interest?
there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the current crisis exit strategy which the commission is pursuing is going to destroy social services of general interest in the member states.
i also want to address the issue of social services of general interest on which i am a rapporteur.
it is not good enough simply to have no impact it must have a positive impact.
that is not good enough because article nine is intended to promote the objectives of the european union as outlined in article three of the treaty.
one of the other aspects of this agreement which i mentioned this morning is the insistence by the commission that the minimum wage in ireland be reduced by eur two zero a year.
you need only look at the memorandum of understanding which the commission has concluded with the irish government for a demonstration of that. it is stated on page two that a reduction of current expenditure in two thousand and eleven of just over eur two billion will be implemented including social protection expenditure reductions a reduction of public service employment numbers a reduction of existing public service pensions on a progressive basis other expenditure savings of over eur one billion and a reduction of close to eur two billion in public capital expenditure against existing plans for.
this is the obligation on the commission and it must implement the treaties.
we never hear it talking about macro social monitoring of what member states are doing in pursuit of european social policy and objectives.
and yet we reduce the minimum wage by eur two zero a year.
these are questions which the commission must respond to.
given the current economic situation it is really important to have this economic governance framework in place as soon as possible.
secondly to address the challenges to public finances and macroeconomic imbalances the european commission has proposed a comprehensive strengthening of economic governance in the european union the legislative package you referred to in your question. the package includes as you know proposals to address excessive public debt more seriously than in the past by defining a satisfactory pace of debt reduction. it also proposes minimum
to address the challenges revealed by the crisis the commission has launched several policy initiatives. to reinforce the stability of our financial system the eu has agreed on a new architecture for financial regulation.
explicit reinforces this very model of europe by bringing together efforts to improve performance in areas such as labour participation lifelong education labour adaptability and mobility and social inclusion.
mr president russia's new legislation which bans the so called promotion of untraditional sexual relations has unleashed a wave of reactionary anti lgbti violence.
the results are available for all to see on youtube with far right homophobic groups with disgusting names like occupy paedophilia' and occupy gerontophilia' torturing and beating up lgbti people.
this new law is part of a general clampdown on democratic rights with the incredible one hundred year ban on pride taking place in moscow the disgraceful prison conditions that forced the pussy riot member into hunger strike and the outrageous arrests of greenpeace activists.
friends and comrades of my own in russia for example igor yasin from socialist resistance have repeatedly been arrested by the authorities for taking part in lgbti rallies and been beaten up by paramilitary thugs for speaking out against racism and for rights.
as often happens it is the lgbti community that is on the frontline of oppression and injury to one is an injury to all.
it is not that surprising because that was precisely the point of the legislation to send a clear message that the state condones violence against gay people.
we will continue supporting civil society organisations notably through the eidhr in russia.
most recently the european union called upon the united nations human rights council on seventeen september during its twenty four th session to pay urgent attention to the situation in russia with regard to these two pieces of legislation and called upon the russian federation to uphold its commitment to protect the enjoyment of basic rights of expression of assembly and of opinion by all. we invited russia to actively strive towards a more conducive attitude regarding the inclusion and tolerance of minorities in russian society.
therefore we have called on russia to amend this legislation in our human rights consultations but also in other political dialogues.
it was repeated by eeas senior officials during the last general assembly of the eu russia civil society forum just this monday and we also together with the member states engage actively in trial observation to assess the fairness of the justice system.
russia should know that these developments will not strengthen our relationship.
we have also engaged in moscow in dedicated exchanges with representatives of the presidential council for civil society and human rights who have been at the forefront of the proposals to amend these laws.
over the last month we took every opportunity to restate our firm support for their work whilst stressing that they are not in any way anyone's agent.
therefore our efforts have also aimed at continuing to support these ngos so as to help them continue their legitimate work.
around seventy organisations have been warned not to receive foreign funding or have received a notice of violation according to which they should register as a foreign agent'.
we have repeatedly flagged the inconsistencies between these commitments and the new laws recently adopted on libel treason demonstrations ngo foreign funding blasphemy so called homosexual propaganda as well as on internet control. the questions that you have raised essentially
the high representative has reacted publicly every time new problematic laws were passed which has made our position very clear and very well known.
we are convinced that the law prohibiting so called homosexual propaganda stigmatises particular groups and individuals and leads to violence.
we have also systematically raised these issues in all our discussion with our russian counterparts.
first we have continued to pursue intensive diplomatic efforts to express our concerns with regard to the adoption and implementation of these laws.
from the outset the european union has made clear that we believe that russia should respect its international commitments and strive for a system fully based on the rule of law respect for human rights and an ever more democratic society.
draw on two of these recent pieces of legislation the law on foreign agents and the law on promotion of non traditional sexual relations among children and minors as it is called.
this label is a clear attempt to discredit these organisations or to silence them through self censorship harassment or by cutting down their sources of financing.
some of them like golos an election monitoring organisation have been closed or fined.
this message was stressed during the visit of the eeas senior officials to russia at the end of september.
we further stressed the importance of having a better format for our human rights consultation which in our view should take place in moscow and with the participation of russian ministers.
we will continue to keep in constant contact in moscow in the regions and in brussels with these organisations.
i myself have regular contact with the russian authorities especially from the ministry of justice and interior and i have raised this question numerous times in moscow and in meetings here in brussels and elsewhere.
the crackdown on civil society the discrimination against sexual minorities and the persisting deficiencies in the rule of law will not be without effect on bilateral relations with russia.
we believe it is in russia's best interest to foster the rule of law and to adopt legislation in conformity with its commitment and the values shared by the members of the council of europe.
we believe that our support in areas as different as the rights of conscripts the protection of journalists and minority rights contribute to the establishment of the rule of law in russia.
we very much hope that russia will look again at these texts and the implementation of the legislation and fully heed the recommendation by the venice commission due early next year.
we have issued similar statements in the council of europe and in the osce.
what we should be spying on is on how russia deals with human rights violations.
so what does putin what does the duma want with a law like that?
commissioner our question was to you and also to the council which unfortunately is not represented here today what are you doing in order to make sure that lesbian gay bisexual and transgender rights are safeguarded in russia?
russia is a member of the council of europe and has signed the european declaration on human rights so we supposedly have a shared commitment as europeans to human rights standards on this continent but what we are seeing at the moment is really a scary increase in violence against certain people.
i hear the very clear support for that and your concerns in this house.
so this is continuously raised in our dialogues on all levels at ministerial level and at working level with the russian authorities.
let me also apologise to mr cashman because i forgot to answer his question on visas.
young gays are threatened and persecuted by vigilantes violence against lgbt people has increased and activists are detained and prosecuted. meanwhile the eu and some of the member states are still treating the putin regime as a regular friendly government. my own country the netherlands is
let us do what we can mostly to support the russian people as their government abandons them.
let us be clear there can be no further trade liberalisation and no further visa liberalisation without more respect for civil rights and for the rights of lgbt people in russia.
the anti gay propaganda law is a horrible symbol of the general crackdown on anyone who has an opinion that does not suit mr putin.
there can be no meeting russian counterparts or celebrating the glorious culture and history of russia here without emphasising the need for human rights such as freedom of expression.
they are only the friends of their own power.
this year celebrating four hundred years of ties with russia with all kinds of festivities here and there although the friendship seems to be cooling off rather quickly at the moment.
under the foreign agents law nine organisations are currently under legal charges eighteen received official orders to eliminate violations by registering as foreign agents' and fifty three organisations received warnings not to violate the law.
but let me say that these laws do not reflect decent russian values.
firstly to continue monitoring developments in russia using the lgbt guidelines and engage in dialogue often and without concession and this includes at political summits and human rights consultations and maybe even winter olympics. secondly i would like the commission to consider delaying visa liberalisation with the russian federation.
we must not give them gifts on the back of those who are being discriminated against and suppressed.
they reflect putin's ever tighter hand of steel. it is a dictatorial style in which opposition voices are silenced and minorities shunned. the russian government therefore needs to respect its human rights obligations including the european convention on human rights. but commissioner let me call on yourselves the college and the external action service to do two things.
these legal restrictions are coupled with harassment intimidation of human rights defenders and civil society representatives. harassment they are stigmatised as enemies of russia and its traditional values whatever they may be when they defend the rights of ethnic minorities migrants and ltbt people.
in two thousand and eleven building on that two thousand and six law we saw a federal law adopted.
this also brings the suppression not only of lesbian gay bisexual and transgender people and their ngos but of other human rights defenders lgbti people and other minorities and it brings the suppression and oppression to new heights.
this is one of the great absurdities of this time because foreign agent' was a term applied by stalin to the enemies of the state.
the country has every right to celebrate its great share and great role in dissent and human rights defence we have the supreme award of the european parliament for freedom of expression named after andrei sakharov one of the greatest russians of the twentieth century but all of a sudden we have to remind russia of its great role and try to shame it for stigmatising the best of russia. this is a great paradox and i do not think we should be silent.
even people perceived as being beyond the pale must be treated with respect for the rule of law.
before we point the finger at russia members of this parliament should look into their own conduct. we have heard that russia is restricting freedom of expression.
if it is that will be reprehensible.
however many eu member states lock people up for expressing opinions that do not have any hint of violence.
indeed commissioner reding would like to go further and criminalise thought crime.
i am sure that many members here have been speaking honesty and from the heart but i believe that behind this debate is an agenda that has got very little to do with sexuality or freedom of expression it is about russia's foreign policy.
mr president many of us from across the political divide watched with delight as the iron curtain came down and the former countries of the soviet union embraced freedom.
his case and that is why i raised it was illustrative of a serious and sustained decline in the rule of law and human rights in russia whose government has effectively created an enemy of all those who simply want to live their lives in peace without harming anyone.
we know russian society clearly attaches much importance to what its leaders call traditional family values'.
but they do not have the right in a free and democratic society and as members of the council of europe to make the lives of gay people a living hell by prohibiting access to vital support networks and stifling expressions of identity.
i therefore join all colleagues in this house in seeking to know what the european union has done to raise these fundamental questions of human rights and the rule of law with the russian authorities.
i hear what commissioner malmstrm has said nobody here doubts the importance of our strategic commercial political and security relations with russia;
but we have a duty to speak out against injustices perpetrated on some of the most vulnerable members of society.
now the sochi olympic games are approaching swiftly and so is the fear that the olympic charter might not be respected.
the justice system then becomes a tool of political power.
it is actually the combination of developments which is particularly tricky.
that mass surveillance programme will allow him to monitor people to intimidate them and to basically shut them up to gag them.
it may not officially be our business but i am personally shocked and horrified by its attitude in banning visible expressions of support to ngos and lgbt people saying that kind of support would be politics'.
how can it be politics to remind mr putin of his treaty obligations as a member of the council of europe?
how can it be politics to call for respect for existing human rights legislation?
i would also like to say to the ioc and its members because they are human beings and they are hiding behind legalistic arguments silence is also a message.
i would like to call on the ioc to urgently revise its stance.
therefore we have to consider suspension of russian membership of the council of europe.
i would also like to ask the commission what about the proposals for visa liberalisation with russia?
according to official israeli land records one third of the land within the settlements is privately held by palestinians.
at the moment it does open the door for that potentially to happen which is not only wrong but it is also in contrast to official eu policy.
instead of opening a loophole for these goods to come into the eu market with preferential access in reality the door to the eu market should be shut altogether.
over six hundred of the palestinian owned structures which were dismantled last year were located within the settlements and last year five palestinians including two children were killed and over a thousand people were injured by settlers or by security forces in incidents related to the settlements.
the danger exists that an innocent person may be subject to arbitrary stops interrogations or travel disruption.
it outlines human rights data protection and non discrimination standards in an attempt to uphold two basic principles for any profiling exercise to meet that repressive consequences should be based on individual behaviour and that the principle of equality under the law should be upheld.
there has also been a move in policing towards a predictive and preventive approach which while not without value in some circumstances can lead to repressive measures against innocent people based on stereotyping often on the basis of race or even religion.
besides concerns regarding legitimacy i strongly question the effectiveness of profiling.
there is a great risk of alienating these people who may then end up not cooperating with the police ultimately hindering security.
if possible all safeguards for profiling should be drawn together in a single legal instrument.
fifty the most obvious risk of profiling is on the basis of ethnicity or race.
in a world of increasing international exchange of data the identification of someone as a person of security or policing interest if not corrected could have not only inconvenient or expensive but indeed appalling consequences.
we are all familiar with thrillers where the psychologist is called in to draw up a criminal profile of the murder suspect;
if used by police officers as the only basis of deciding whom to stop search or arrest it is lazy misguiding stereotyping which amounts to illegal discrimination against minorities.
one need only remember that canadian torture flight victim maher arrar on whose horrendous experience the film rendition' was based was picked up due to profiling based on people his brother happened to know;
and if a witness gives a clear description a profile of a bank robber let us say white male and thirty it would be nonsense to arrest someone who was asian female and about.
currently the eu itself is proposing a number of measures that facilitate profiling a technique of pulling together data from various sources in order to make a sort of template against which are identified those people whose characteristics behaviour or associates seem suspicious and who merit further screening as likely perpetrators of crime or terrorism.
thirty two per cent of british muslims report being subject to discrimination at airports.
this report therefore asks for european or national legislation on profiling to be brought in compliance with existing european law and international treaties.
to keep looking for suspicious people on the basis of looks or behaviour can distract from the search for those who are really dangerous.
there is also the risk of the real criminals adapting to the profile by using innocent looking people as drug mules or suicide bombers or by changing travel routes away from those monitored.
in my own city london the impact on young black men has led to tougher guidelines and safeguards none of which it must be stressed should impede the intelligence led investigation of crime.
then if that flagging of them as a person of interest is not promptly removed longer term restrictions could follow such as refusal of visas and entry bans on employment or even arrest and detention.
the reason i am concerned about profiling and data mining is because they depart from the general rule that law enforcement decisions should be based on an individual's personal conduct.
for example as regards border controls the provisions of article six of the schengen borders code require that border guards execute checks with no discrimination against travellers on grounds of racial or ethnic origin religion or belief.
the agency is about to present a good practices handbook for combating and preventing ethnic profiling.