kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
push' method. the question of proportionality should be viewed in the general context of the laws of the third country in this case australia and the security threat faced by
of the negotiations. on the issue of the transfer of data between the us and canada this was and continues to be governed by the memorandum of understanding signed between those two countries. its purpose is the sharing of look out' and advance passenger information data between canadian border service agencies and the united states customs and border protection to identify high risk travellers
let me start with a few remarks on necessity and proportionality and on profiling.
of data. only such an agreement would then be the legal basis for
flight. secondly real time use prior to the flight by checking pnr against pre determined risk assessment criteria and against databases on wanted persons. thirdly there is pro active use also known as trend analysis to create or update risk assessment criteria.
the commission is therefore convinced that pnr is an important tool in fighting serious crime and terrorism when it is complemented by strong data protection guarantees and when the necessity and proportionality principles are respected.
profiling. on the eu australia agreement the commission's view is that the new agreement respects the council's negotiating mandate and the resolution of this house. we consider that it respects the principles of necessity and proportionality. we should bear in mind that the agreement has a well defined and specific purpose limitation a limited period of detention of
of our legal service. i can say that the commission is seeking improvements to the text on a small
forward. the commission is seeking to have the same provisions included in the us and canadian agreements.
pnr. the commission's approach to both the european pnr and pnr agreements with third countries is therefore in line with eu data protection legislation which grants every individual the right not to be subject to a decision which produces legal effects concerning him or her and which is based exclusively or to a decisive extent on automated processing of data on him
negatively. both the member states and the us assure us that the only agreement regulating pnr is the one that the us signed
that country. members have raised important questions on dispute resolution suspension and termination. the procedures for terminating the agreement would be the same as those for concluding the agreement and therefore parliament's role is
matters. the memorandum of understanding was not intended to be in itself the legal basis for the exchange of data between that member state
we hope to be able to present you with a draft text very soon but i cannot undertake to do so before the summer break.
but that is for later there are no negotiations whatsoever ongoing with any other country.
today we have three agreements with australia canada and the us.
it is like being pregnant you cannot be a little bit' pregnant.
they challenged the core the proportionality and the necessity of long term storage.
there is no such thing as a little bit' of pull'.
they went right to the core.
i had hoped that in this plenary session we would be voting through the agreements between the eu canada the us and australia.
i believe that the swift adoption of these agreements is essential and that such agreements are an essential tool in the fight against terrorism.
i think it is right that we use this time to ask the right questions and gather as much information as we can from the commission as to the compatibility of such agreements with european law and on their practical implementation.
but for me personally the necessity and the proportionality of these agreements have been long apparent from the number of crimes they have helped prevent and the number of criminals that they have contributed to catching.
the questions which we are asking here this evening are incredibly important.
answers to them would make the process of decision making for this house a lot easier and a lot more informed.
we are at a crucial juncture at which every negotiation and every process finds itself.
a time when we have to move forward and do our jobs;
i would like to start by adding yet another one.
that means that there is no legal basis for the transfer of data to those countries.
essentially what is being done is that data is stored because it may come in handy one day in order to solve crimes that have not yet been committed and that we are not aware of. that is not proportional and your own legal advisers and those of the council agree.
it is important that regardless of what third state we are negotiating with we build on common principles. secondly we cannot have vastly different standards of protection for european citizens depending on which third state they are flying to.
by doing this we risk creating an incentive for member states to begin to develop bilateral agreements which will then undermine our work at eu level.
we should ensure full respect for the charter.
the scope as everyone has said should not be unnecessarily wide.
all of these principles are still up for grabs in some of the negotiations. if the eu institutions' own legal services are providing opinions against the current status of negotiations then we should listen and ensure the agreements we put in place respect the fundamental rights of eu citizens.
so i welcome this agreement which i believe will lift people out of poverty in vietnam and enable them to engage vigorously in improving their own political and human rights in their own country in good time.
i am pleased to see this agreement finalised. let us engage constructively continuing our dialogue provide governance assistance and get on with seeing this fta become successful.
it does not just happen because a country ratifies international agreements or they are bombarded with demands from potential trade partners.
asean is the eu's third largest trading partner and vietnam is growing in importance within asean with a vibrant economy.
despite several reminders open letters and so on and even strong criticism from the eu ombudsperson that the fact of not doing so would amount to maladministration the commission refused to follow this recommendation.
therefore i welcomed very much that the commission already in two thousand and twelve committed itself to systematically carrying out human rights impact assessments for free trade agreements which it expressed in the eu action plan for human rights and democracy.
i do not think that any explanation of sustainability criteria in the eu free trade agreement with vietnam will be sufficient.
but the commission committed to including a human rights impact assessment in the next expost evaluation.
madam president during my visit to hanoi this month i saw a capital with a lively growing economy and remarkable results in achieving many of the millennium development goals but i also learned about the absence of free trade unions and increased pressure on human rights activists and that the country ranks one hundred and seventy five out of one hundred and eighty countries in the two thousand and fifteen press freedom index. the changes that come with more trade and with free trade agreements do not automatically lead to a society without economic inequalities
un experts this summer voiced clear concerns over the adverse impact of free trade and investment agreements on human rights and also called for exante and expost human rights impact assessments.
the main reason recently given was the lack of time and the fact that the commission does not want to delay the conclusion of the free trade agreement.
in april two thousand and fourteen this parliament urged the commission to carry out as soon as possible a human rights impact assessment.
it has important potential in terms of jobs and growth not least for the eu in the current context of tpp but also for vietnam.
but it is clear that this potential can only be realised if appropriate measures are taken to maximise positive and prevent negative impacts on human rights.
therefore could the commission explain why it is not possible to undertake a proper ex ante human rights impact assessment so we can understand a roadmap for addressing our concerns and improving the solution?
it is also evident that the usual mix of instruments will not do the trick.
not only do they have their shortcomings which have been widely documented;
but can we really just blindly transpose this approach onto the most far reaching fta that has ever been achieved with a developing country? some argue that the commission's timid approach to human rights is exactly why it is important that under the partnership and cooperation agreement there is a communication mechanism between the european external action service eeas and parliament on the implementation of the pca and capacitybuilding to enhance the settlement of complaints by the affected communities.
this is not about trying to undermine the fta or pointing the finger at the vietnamese government.
we take note of your comments and we will pass them on to mr schulz.
whether this free trade agreement will help or hinder the human rights situation in vietnam is probably the more important question and i happen to agree with the commissioner that constructive engagement is the way to improve the human rights situation in vietnam.
i can confirm that issues relating to human rights have been addressed in the context of the eu vietnam free trade agreement negotiations with the aim of embedding respect for human rights in the agreement and also with a view to enhancing its positive impact and minimising the risk of adverse impacts.
the preamble of the agreement reaffirms the eu's and vietnam's commitment to key international human rights principles and instruments.
there is also an institutional and legal link between the free trade agreement and the partnership and cooperation agreement with vietnam.
these links ensure that respect for human rights underpins eu vietnam bilateral relations including the fta and enable us to take measures considered appropriate in the event of a breach of the agreement.
the fta also contains provisions ensuring the transparency and inclusiveness of the decision making process and any legal proceedings thereby strengthening the enabling environment for the respect of human rights democracy and the rule of law in vietnam.
with regard to labour rights the fta includes an ambitious chapter on trade and sustainable development and that includes not only respect for all core labour standards and ratification of fundamental ilo conventions and their implementation but it also pays special attention to corporate social responsibility and fair and ethical trade schemes.
the monitoring of human rights development in vietnam is of course very important.
this will continue to be done primarily through the institutions and structures set up in the pca framework including the human rights dialogue and there will be a meeting in a couple of weeks again. we also have a dedicated instrument the european instrument for democracy and human rights as you all know.
the implementation of the commitments undertaken will be followed up in both the eu and vietnam through the mechanisms and institutions established therein as well as through the existing eu civil society dialogue and with ex post evaluations of the fta.
i strongly believe and i think mr lange said the same that trade liberalisation and human rights can and must go hand in hand. the new communication on trade and investment that the commission published a couple of weeks ago makes it clear that eu trade policy must be for all citizens; consumers;
small big and medium sized companies;
and the poorest people in the developing countries.
it must deliver growth jobs and innovation but it has to be responsible and that means that eu trade policy must defend european values.
it has to be effective at delivering economic opportunities and it has to be transparent and open to public scrutiny.
the commission wants to ensure that trade policy contributes to the advancement of human rights in the eu and in third countries in conjunction with our other policies foreign policy and development cooperation.
the commission is as you know convinced that the policy of engagement is more effective than a policy exclusively based on conditionality even if that can also play a role.
engagement allows us to engage and to create channels for dialogue keeping them open with a lot of stakeholders involved.
we intend to make full use of those channels to promote change on the ground in vietnam.
trade as an element of the broader eu foreign policy agenda is one of the more concrete instruments and one where parliament plays a leading and important role.
but we should also think of development policies. we see too that citizens are increasingly and actively getting involved with this discussion and we welcome this.
people in europe are very clear that they want to see human rights at the top of the european foreign policy agenda. i believe that human rights are key.
i think that the eu has both the opportunity and the responsibility to lead in ensuring that universal human rights are respected worldwide.
while trade must be an important lever it cannot in and of itself be the solution to end all suffering and problems.
listening to the public debates people sometimes have very high hopes of the impact that trade can have.
but realistically we must do what we can.
besides the anticipated boost to development and economic well being building on vietnam's efforts to lift people out of poverty i would like to know what short term measures are anticipated.
there is a lot that has to be improved in vietnam.
free expression free association freedom of assembly are all controlled and under pressure;
torture and beatings unfortunately happen too regularly;
we need to work and build on the human rights dialogue and show political leadership.
i look forward to continuing this discussion and monitoring the impact this trade agreement will have on human rights in vietnam.
nobody denies that there are severe problems relating to human rights in vietnam. you have listed many of them and i could add a few more.
we do have the human rights dialogue that the eeas is conducting.
to explain all this we will by the end of this year in a couple of weeks publish an ad hoc commission paper explaining how the existing measures of the partnership agreement and the negotiated measures of the free trade agreement will contribute to human rights empowerment with the flanking measures that we will put in place and how the human rights i mentioned will be assessed once the latter agreement has entered into force. all this will of course be public and transparent so that you can follow and contribute to the dialogue.
this agreement will be finally concluded next week.
i support the negotiations as trade agreements have demonstrated the potential for economic growth and jobs on both sides.
however it is fundamental that the commission address the relationship between trade liberalisation and improving human rights in trade negotiations in the future including in the new trade strategy that it plans to put forward.
in two thousand and fifteen the commission launched the eu anticorruption experience sharing programme. it offers anticorruption practitioners from member states a forum for exchanging views on topics of common interest and on legislative and institutional reforms and policy initiatives in other member states.
they include enforcement mechanisms and proportionate effective and dissuasive sanctions for possible breaches. transparency and accountability are key principles of the commission's decisionmaking process.
adequate whistleblowing mechanisms that codify processes within public administration to allow officials channels for reporting what they may perceive as irregularities or even illegal acts can help overcome detection problems inherent to corruption.
facilitating experience sharing among member states in the fight against corruption is a key aspect of anti corruption efforts at eu level.
seventeen six months on average despite its limited resources. this speaks for the commitment of olaf staff to getting the job done.
all in all the balance is rather negative.
the second is the regulation on the rule of law proposed for the new multiannual financial framework. this instrument could actually play an important role in incentivising the member states to play by the rules.
zero corruption across the european union must be our goal. we need strict controls from institutions and we need our citizens to make governments accountable.
these actions pay particular attention to the need to combat sexual violence;
failure to make substantial progress in the defence police and justice sectors will jeopardise the sustainability of achievements made in the economic social and political areas. in this period of elections tackling these issues should undoubtedly be an agenda shared by all congolese democratic forces as the future of the whole country is at stake.
to improve this situation it is important to continue military and non military action against the rebels.
the eu is already providing support to the security sector reform through common security and defence policy missions and the european commission as well as bilateral support from member states.
for example eupol has deployed a specific team of experts on sexual violence in goma support.
the eu is ready to do more if common ground for progress is found with member states and the republic of congo authorities.
the prevalence of sexual violence both reflects and perpetuates the subordinate status of most women throughout the country.
naturally support for victims should be an immediate priority and the eu is already committed to providing medical care and mitigating suffering.
and to deliver justice.
it is vital that we support the ngos which are bringing aid to the victims and particularly the hospitals.
however can i please ask the commission to bring forward a legislative proposal similar to the dodd frank act in the united states which imposes reporting requirements on conflict materials in manufacturing?
that way those who profit from such atrocities will be held accountable.
if it was we could perhaps hope to see the government take action to prevent the mass rape of women and to prosecute those responsible for that heinous crime.
the latest mass rapes in south kivu province are another sorry chapter in the violent and troubled history of the drc which is verging on being a failed state.
the organisation has extended its mission to the drc but if our conclusion is that the mandate is insufficient to effectively intervene we must encourage its revision.
the un must also carry out an independent inquiry so that we can learn about the scope and the scale of these horrific crimes.
the international community as well as the media have an essential role to prevent sexual violence and to raise awareness.
the authorities of the drc must prioritise the ending of violence and of sexual violence in particular.
as a result of taboos victims often do not speak out and when they do they risk being excluded from their communities.
the fact that there are so many problems in the drc must make us more vigilant and engaged. we must never allow a situation where rape is routine and where hundreds of thousands of people particularly women suffer in silence.
at home we demand more transparency on the use of conflict minerals.
we all use ict products that potentially contain the minerals that fuel the conflicts in the drc.
i hope that you will agree commissioner that in the context of helping more women into the labour market and in the context of helping people with the important role of childcare that there are indeed many roads to paradise and there is not just the one road that we should exclusively concentrate upon.
the reason for that is and i quote from what the czech council presidency said no one should criticise the decision of those countries that fail to fulfil the barcelona objectives and do not intend to increase efforts for their fulfilment.
that has now risen to the dizzy heights of eighteen meps to hear what is an important statement on an important subject.
there are countries whose citizens based on their historical experience are not interested in placing their children in day care'.
that does not mean of course that we should not try as hard as we can to encourage the provision of day care and make quality day care available for those who want to use it.
i was very encouraged by your words but was very discouraged to notice that only twelve colleagues were here to hear it.
commissioner many of my constituents are babies and very young children and tonight i would like to speak on their behalf especially as there are many very good speakers tonight who can speak effectively for women in the workplace. the care a child receives in the earliest years will have an impact on him or her throughout life.
many students of child development like maria montessori have noted the need a young child has for the presence of his or her mother or mother substitute. many of them have also noted a watershed in a child's development at two years and nine months after which it becomes safe for a child to spend periods of time away from his or her primary care giver.
in the last decade brain imaging technology has backed up those observations demonstrating that there is a definite shift in the child's brain that allows him or her to internalise the primary care giver usually the mother so that she is available to the child in active memory even when she is not present.
at that time the child can understand that the mother or the substitute primary care giver will come back and is not gone forever.
of course life is not like that and mothers often work outside the home.
they may want to work or choose to and even if they do not they may need to earn because mortgages must be paid and food must be put on the table. women have been a wonderful addition to the workforce.
their inclusion and equal treatment is a matter of fundamental rights.
however babies do not know nor are they able to consider what their mothers must or want to do.
they are hardwired to need what they need.
nature is a very powerful force.
there are always consequences when we go against nature.
having a loving invested mother is the ideal for a child which we should make every effort to accommodate where a woman wants to be available to her child in those early years.
however as i said women work and we must do our best to at least ensure that if someone other than the primary care giver is taking care of the child below the age of two years nine months that it is someone who can give the child as nurturing a care as possible. some children are fortunate enough to receive this care from secondary care givers like fathers grandparents other relatives close neighbours people who are committed to them and part of their life on an ongoing basis.
however this is simply not the lot of most babies and toddlers who would be cared for in childcare facilities.
it behoves us to ensure that those facilities are clean safe stimulating and above all nurturing and are not just holding centres.
the foundation they receive is of utmost importance but the time space and nurturing children need to grow and develop fully is becoming a luxury afforded to fewer and fewer.
for better or for worse we are shaping europe's future by how we raise our children.
i would ask the commission to view this issue for a moment from a child's point of view.
this is because such rights more often than not turn out to be outside the scope of community law as you have just rightly pointed out.
my wish my very sincere wish is that your report will help people to see this clearly and realistically.
this demonstrates the useful direct contact with the citizen that the committee provides.